Ehninger, Douglas "On Systems of Rhetoric"
From RhetorClick
(Created page with "In his article, Ehninger argues that it is beneficial to view different periods of rhetoric as different systems of rhetoric. He breaks these down into three periods from which ...") |
Meg Seeger (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | In | + | In "On Systems of Rhetoric," Ehninger argues that it is beneficial to view different periods of rhetoric as different systems of rhetoric. He breaks these down into three periods from which different systems arose: Classical Rhetoric, “New” Rhetoric, and Contemporary Rhetoric. He argues that “systems of rhetoric arise out of a felt need and are shaped in part by the intellectual and social environment in which the need exists” (327). Therefore, each new system sought to look beyond what the previous had, but in doing so, often ignored the important and necessary aspects of the previous. For example, Ehninger states, the system of “New” Rhetoric focused on the psychological and the rhetor-audience relationship, but de-emphasized the importance of grammar in rhetoric that Classical Rhetoric pointed out. Contemporary Rhetoric did a similar thing by emphasizing the sociological side of rhetoric and de-emphasizing the audience relationship and grammar. Ehninger argues that the study of systems of rhetoric is beneficial because “it directs attention to the dangers and difficulties involved in constructing a rhetoric. And surely this information is helpful both in evaluating systems of the past and in building systems to meet the changing needs of the future” (328). |
Revision as of 16:55, 12 April 2012
In "On Systems of Rhetoric," Ehninger argues that it is beneficial to view different periods of rhetoric as different systems of rhetoric. He breaks these down into three periods from which different systems arose: Classical Rhetoric, “New” Rhetoric, and Contemporary Rhetoric. He argues that “systems of rhetoric arise out of a felt need and are shaped in part by the intellectual and social environment in which the need exists” (327). Therefore, each new system sought to look beyond what the previous had, but in doing so, often ignored the important and necessary aspects of the previous. For example, Ehninger states, the system of “New” Rhetoric focused on the psychological and the rhetor-audience relationship, but de-emphasized the importance of grammar in rhetoric that Classical Rhetoric pointed out. Contemporary Rhetoric did a similar thing by emphasizing the sociological side of rhetoric and de-emphasizing the audience relationship and grammar. Ehninger argues that the study of systems of rhetoric is beneficial because “it directs attention to the dangers and difficulties involved in constructing a rhetoric. And surely this information is helpful both in evaluating systems of the past and in building systems to meet the changing needs of the future” (328).
