“A philosopher is someone who takes a natural law and applies logic to the natural law and derives an idea from that logic. On the other pole, a rhetorician has an argument, applies the most effective logic, and compares it to a natural law to conclude one’s definition.” http://www.public.iastate.edu/~jimhinch/A%20Rhetorician's%20Art.pdf

I was googling the definition of rhetorician and this was one of the websites that popped up. I have been sitting here for a really long time trying to think… which one of the blogs I can talk about when I can’t really wrap my head around either topic. So I thought my best bet would be to turn to my good ‘ol friend Google.

Is it sad to think that all of our philosophers are turning into rhetoricians… when we all know that rhetoric’s main purpose is to persuade? It seems to me that the days of Plato and Aristotle sitting around, drinking a class of mead, looking at the stars and getting down to some deep, philosophical conversation are, unfortunately, long gone. Indeed that is a sad thing to me. I bet Plato was a deep dude and awesome to hang out with and just listen to all his ideas and theories. I bet he would have listened to Pink Floyd had he been of this time... but I digress...

Lanham’s theory will have a huge impact on the way composition is taught, as more and more technology is developed and information even more at our fingertips. In the article, it says for rhetoricians, every argument has a counter-argument. The use of the internet makes it so much easier for rhetoricians to go back and forth, debating over who is right in their argument, why they are right… and vice versa. The article also says, “A good rhetorician acts by compromising and correlating spontaneously in a debate in a public sphere of interaction with an audience.” My example of this: blogs. I may be way out in left field here, but it just seems to me that philosophers were the great thinkers and rhetoricians are nothing but megalomaniacs who are hell bent on proving themselves right and persuading their listener over to their side of the argument. I wonder if I am even making any sense. I know what I am trying to say, formulating the idea into a coherent blog… well that is a totally different story.

The artifact I have chosen to write my rhetorical analysis on is a shirt that I bought from Wal-Mart. I have not really began any of my writing as of yet. I am thinking of writing on the appeal to pathos and logos. I was shopping for clothes to wear during my observation days at Lubbock high school. We have to dress in “teacher clothes” and, of course, that means we need to look professional. I not only wanted to look professional, but stylish as well. As I was browsing through the shirts, I found one that had an extra descriptive tag on it. The words that caught my eye were “instantly slimming”. Wow! Who doesn’t want something that instantly slims you? Well of course that appealed to my pathos. I tried the shirt on and indeed – it was slimming and very flattering. The next thing that I was interested in was the price. Being a single mom, I cannot afford to pay designer prices for my clothes. The price was perfect, under 20 bucks. That particular aspect appealed to my logos – factual data and statistics. And finally, the last prerequisite was: color. Did the color flatter me? Did I have any pants that I would be able to mix and match it with? Yes! The color looked great, and it just so happened that I had 2 pairs of pants to mix and match it with… I am unsure about that one; it seems to appeal to my pathos and logos.

So far, that is about all I have for my analysis. I am sure if I sat down and made some kind of outline, I would have a good start – its just finding the time to do so.

Hmm... rhetoric = persuasion. Therefore by approaching each situation carefully and choosing my words very carefully and convincingly - perhaps it will be possible to use it to my advantage.

Maybe I could take my boss in the office and say, "Look, this is my claim. I am a great employee. I come in and cover whenever you ask, I stay late when you need me and I never call in sick. I think it is time for you to give me a raise." My claim is backed up by facts... the fact that I am sick of busting my butt for a measly 6.75 and hour. I could even take it as far as comparing myself to the other employees that slack off and yet seem to make more than me. That would just be more evidence to back up my claim an surely that would do the trick.

There is also the relationship part of my life. Yes, my boyfriend of 2 years wants to get married... but (and there is a huge but) I have been married before. All I got was 1/4 of a carat... now if you know anything about jewelry, you know that the only way to see THAT diamond is with a microscope. So my claim? "Yes, I will marry you, but only if you get me at least 1 carat." My evidence to convince him that I deserve a carat? "Look, honey, I put up with you having a mistress - her name is Texas Longhorn football - and I put up with you constantly changing the radio station to talk news radio when we are in the car, I also pacify you by letting you hold the remote control when we watch TV... and patiently sit through you flipping from ESPN to Fox News every five minutes and last but not least, I have yet to kill your monster in the front yard that ripped my favorite jeans with his razor sharp teeth... need I go on?" And I am more than certain I will get my 1 carat, pear shaped, high quality, platinum wedding band set!!

Oh I love the art of persuasion!! =)