Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Obamas Preacher vs. Bushes Preacher??
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BrownShark" data-source="post: 333686" data-attributes="member: 12148"><p>ARROW,</p><p> </p><p>Here is your post with the RHETORIC and TALKING points redacted:</p><p> </p><p></p><p><strong>(WHERES THE BEEF??)</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Rhetoric</strong> <strong>is the art of harnessing reason, emotions and authority, through language, with a view to persuade an audience and, by persuading, to convince this audience to act, to pass judgment or to identify with given values.</strong> According to Plato, rhetoric is the “art of enchanting the soul.”</p><p>In Greece, rhetoric originated in a school of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Socratic" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">pre-Socratic</span></u></a> philosophers known as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophists" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">Sophists</span></u></a> c.600 BC. It was later taught, in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">Roman Empire</span></u></a>, and during the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Ages" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">Middle Ages</span></u></a>, as one of the three original <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_arts" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">liberal arts</span></u></a> or <em><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivium_%28education%29" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">trivium</span></u></a></em> (along with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">logic</span></u></a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammar" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">grammar</span></u></a>).</p><p>In Ancient and Medieval eras of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Europe" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">European history</span></u></a>, rhetoric concerned itself with persuasion in public and political settings such as assemblies and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">courts of law</span></u></a>. As such, rhetoric is said to flourish in open and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">democratic</span></u></a> societies with rights of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">free speech</span></u></a>, free assembly, and political enfranchisement for some portion of the population. <strong>However, celebratory (or </strong><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epideictic" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff"><strong>epideictic</strong></span></u></a><strong>) rhetoric, alongside deliberative rhetoric, is just as important an element of tyrannical regimes or </strong><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogmatic_theology" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #800080"><strong>dogmatic</strong></span></u></a><strong> (religious and otherwise)</strong> public entities that are not open to debate on an equal footing.</p><p> </p><p><strong>In contraposition to scientific debates , rhetorical </strong><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff"><strong>arguments</strong></span></u></a><strong>, as in politics or even justice, do not make use of demonstrable or tested truths, but resort to fallible opinions, popular perceptions, transient beliefs, chosen evidence or evidence at hand (like statistics), which are all properly called commonplaces as they help establish a commonality of understanding between the orator or rhetor and his/her audience.</strong></p><p><strong>(<span style="color: red">THIS SECTION DESCRIBES YOU</span><span style="color: black">)</span></strong></p><p> </p><p>Contemporary studies of rhetoric have a more diverse range of practices and meanings than was the case in ancient times. The concept of rhetoric has thus shifted widely during its 3300-year history. Rhetoricians have recently argued that the classical understanding of rhetoric is limited because persuasion depends on communication, which in turn depends on meaning. Thus the scope of rhetoric is understood to include much more than simply public--legal and political--discourse. This emphasis on meaning and how it is constructed and conveyed draws on a large body of critical and social theory (see <em><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literary_theory" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">literary theory</span></u></a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_Theory" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">Critical Theory</span></u></a></em>), philosophy (see <em><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-structuralism" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">Post-structuralism</span></u></a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">Hermeneutics</span></u></a></em>), and problems in social science methodology (see <em><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflexivity_%28social_theory%29" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">Reflexivity</span></u></a>)</em>. So while rhetoric has traditionally been thought of as being involved in such arenas as politics, law, public relations, lobbying, marketing and advertising, the study of rhetoric has recently entered into diverse fields such as humanities, religion, social sciences, law,<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric#cite_note-0" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #800080">[1]</span></u></a> science, journalism, history, literature and even cartography and architecture. Every aspect of human life and thought that depends on the articulation and communication of meaning can be said to involve elements of the rhetorical. </p><p> </p><p><strong>Talking Points</strong></p><p> </p><p>A <strong>talking point</strong> is a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neologism" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">neologism</span></u></a> <strong>for an idea which may or may not be factual, usually compiled in a short list with summaries of a speaker's agenda for public or private engagements. Public relations professionals</strong>, for example, sometimes prepare "talking points memos" for their clients to help them more effectively conform public presentations with this advice.</p><p>A political <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_tank" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">think tank</span></u></a> will strategize <strong>the most effective informational attack on a target topic and launch talking points from media personalities to saturate discourse in order to frame a debate in their favor,</strong> <strong><span style="color: red">standardizing the responses of sympathizers to their unique cause while simultaneously co-opting the language used by those discussing the specific subject</span></strong>. <strong>When used politically in this way, the typical purpose of a talking point is to propagandize, specifically using the technique of </strong><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_nauseam" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff"><strong>argumentum ad nauseam</strong></span></u></a><strong>, i.e. continuous repetition within media outlets until accepted as fact.</strong></p><p> </p><p>Big Arrow, you have demonstrated both of these failed ways of communicating. In addition, your dogmatic approach to religious sanctity gives you the hat trick in debates.</p><p> </p><p>If you can understand what I posted in black bold or in red bold which fits you perfectly, you may understand how you appear to others.</p><p> </p><p>The red bold applies to you directly.</p><p> </p><p>People like you, never realize how they have been brainwashed by media talking points and rhetoric. Talk radio is the biggest propagator of rhetoric and talking points (just as in NAZI Germany during WWII).</p><p> </p><p>This is how you control a population. TV personalities say the exact things to keep you on their side (Orielly, Hannity, Chris Wallace, etc etc) They know, study and apply political rhetoric that insure those like you will side with them.</p><p> </p><p>Sean Hannity for example is an extremist who uses <strong>"patriotism"</strong> to maintain control of his audience. His rhetoric is all about being a good patriot along with backdrops of american flags and heroic stories over and over...</p><p> </p><p>Who could find this suspicious? He's just trying to support the troops right?....<strong>WRONG! </strong>This tactic is meant to control your emotions, and after controlling your emotions, you will believe anything else he sez...</p><p> </p><p>ARROW, you speak in pure rhetoric and talking points, then when faced with having to express an opinion on something you repeated from someone else, <strong>YOU DONT HAVE THE FIRST CLUE</strong> how to respond.</p><p> </p><p>This is the problem with guys like you, you are not a better american for calling me a liberal or left wing or any other senseless nametag.</p><p> </p><p>You are the BITTER american. I am the informed.</p><p> </p><p>Peace<img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/peaceful.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":peaceful:" title="Peaceful :peaceful:" data-shortname=":peaceful:" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BrownShark, post: 333686, member: 12148"] ARROW, Here is your post with the RHETORIC and TALKING points redacted: [B](WHERES THE BEEF??)[/B] [B]Rhetoric[/B] [B]is the art of harnessing reason, emotions and authority, through language, with a view to persuade an audience and, by persuading, to convince this audience to act, to pass judgment or to identify with given values.[/B] According to Plato, rhetoric is the “art of enchanting the soul.” In Greece, rhetoric originated in a school of [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Socratic"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]pre-Socratic[/COLOR][/U][/URL] philosophers known as [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophists"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Sophists[/COLOR][/U][/URL] c.600 BC. It was later taught, in the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Roman Empire[/COLOR][/U][/URL], and during the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Ages"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Middle Ages[/COLOR][/U][/URL], as one of the three original [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_arts"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]liberal arts[/COLOR][/U][/URL] or [I][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivium_%28education%29"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]trivium[/COLOR][/U][/URL][/I] (along with [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]logic[/COLOR][/U][/URL] and [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammar"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]grammar[/COLOR][/U][/URL]). In Ancient and Medieval eras of [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Europe"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]European history[/COLOR][/U][/URL], rhetoric concerned itself with persuasion in public and political settings such as assemblies and [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]courts of law[/COLOR][/U][/URL]. As such, rhetoric is said to flourish in open and [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]democratic[/COLOR][/U][/URL] societies with rights of [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]free speech[/COLOR][/U][/URL], free assembly, and political enfranchisement for some portion of the population. [B]However, celebratory (or [/B][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epideictic"][U][COLOR=#0000ff][B]epideictic[/B][/COLOR][/U][/URL][B]) rhetoric, alongside deliberative rhetoric, is just as important an element of tyrannical regimes or [/B][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogmatic_theology"][U][COLOR=#800080][B]dogmatic[/B][/COLOR][/U][/URL][B] (religious and otherwise)[/B] public entities that are not open to debate on an equal footing. [B]In contraposition to scientific debates , rhetorical [/B][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument"][U][COLOR=#0000ff][B]arguments[/B][/COLOR][/U][/URL][B], as in politics or even justice, do not make use of demonstrable or tested truths, but resort to fallible opinions, popular perceptions, transient beliefs, chosen evidence or evidence at hand (like statistics), which are all properly called commonplaces as they help establish a commonality of understanding between the orator or rhetor and his/her audience.[/B] [B]([COLOR=red]THIS SECTION DESCRIBES YOU[/COLOR][COLOR=black])[/COLOR][/B] Contemporary studies of rhetoric have a more diverse range of practices and meanings than was the case in ancient times. The concept of rhetoric has thus shifted widely during its 3300-year history. Rhetoricians have recently argued that the classical understanding of rhetoric is limited because persuasion depends on communication, which in turn depends on meaning. Thus the scope of rhetoric is understood to include much more than simply public--legal and political--discourse. This emphasis on meaning and how it is constructed and conveyed draws on a large body of critical and social theory (see [I][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literary_theory"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]literary theory[/COLOR][/U][/URL] and [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_Theory"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Critical Theory[/COLOR][/U][/URL][/I]), philosophy (see [I][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-structuralism"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Post-structuralism[/COLOR][/U][/URL] and [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Hermeneutics[/COLOR][/U][/URL][/I]), and problems in social science methodology (see [I][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflexivity_%28social_theory%29"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Reflexivity[/COLOR][/U][/URL])[/I]. So while rhetoric has traditionally been thought of as being involved in such arenas as politics, law, public relations, lobbying, marketing and advertising, the study of rhetoric has recently entered into diverse fields such as humanities, religion, social sciences, law,[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric#cite_note-0"][U][COLOR=#800080][1][/COLOR][/U][/URL] science, journalism, history, literature and even cartography and architecture. Every aspect of human life and thought that depends on the articulation and communication of meaning can be said to involve elements of the rhetorical. [B]Talking Points[/B] A [B]talking point[/B] is a [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neologism"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]neologism[/COLOR][/U][/URL] [B]for an idea which may or may not be factual, usually compiled in a short list with summaries of a speaker's agenda for public or private engagements. Public relations professionals[/B], for example, sometimes prepare "talking points memos" for their clients to help them more effectively conform public presentations with this advice. A political [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_tank"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]think tank[/COLOR][/U][/URL] will strategize [B]the most effective informational attack on a target topic and launch talking points from media personalities to saturate discourse in order to frame a debate in their favor,[/B] [B][COLOR=red]standardizing the responses of sympathizers to their unique cause while simultaneously co-opting the language used by those discussing the specific subject[/COLOR][/B]. [B]When used politically in this way, the typical purpose of a talking point is to propagandize, specifically using the technique of [/B][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_nauseam"][U][COLOR=#0000ff][B]argumentum ad nauseam[/B][/COLOR][/U][/URL][B], i.e. continuous repetition within media outlets until accepted as fact.[/B] Big Arrow, you have demonstrated both of these failed ways of communicating. In addition, your dogmatic approach to religious sanctity gives you the hat trick in debates. If you can understand what I posted in black bold or in red bold which fits you perfectly, you may understand how you appear to others. The red bold applies to you directly. People like you, never realize how they have been brainwashed by media talking points and rhetoric. Talk radio is the biggest propagator of rhetoric and talking points (just as in NAZI Germany during WWII). This is how you control a population. TV personalities say the exact things to keep you on their side (Orielly, Hannity, Chris Wallace, etc etc) They know, study and apply political rhetoric that insure those like you will side with them. Sean Hannity for example is an extremist who uses [B]"patriotism"[/B] to maintain control of his audience. His rhetoric is all about being a good patriot along with backdrops of american flags and heroic stories over and over... Who could find this suspicious? He's just trying to support the troops right?....[B]WRONG! [/B]This tactic is meant to control your emotions, and after controlling your emotions, you will believe anything else he sez... ARROW, you speak in pure rhetoric and talking points, then when faced with having to express an opinion on something you repeated from someone else, [B]YOU DONT HAVE THE FIRST CLUE[/B] how to respond. This is the problem with guys like you, you are not a better american for calling me a liberal or left wing or any other senseless nametag. You are the BITTER american. I am the informed. Peace:peaceful: [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Obamas Preacher vs. Bushes Preacher??
Top