The Rhetoric and the
Renaissance 1400• Italy--Machiavelli and Ramus
• Basically nothing new
• Reactions to Greeks and Romans either pro
or con
• Machiavelli--political and applied Aristotle
• Ramus--philosophical and anti-Aristotle
Machiavelli
• To convey religiosity=be generous: “my
ranch as a park”
• To convey compassion=be sensitive: “I
know how you feel”
• To demonstrate faith=be pure in speech and
active: “family values”
• To demonstrate sincerity+remain strong:
“public officials at funerals”
More Machiavelli
• To demonstrate prudence=ponder and
reflect: “Let me think about that for
moment”
• “Everyone sees who you appear to be, few
sense who you really are.” (Smith, p. 205)
Ramus
•
•
•
•
“Everything that Aristotle said is wrong”
Division of the Canon
Inventio and dispositio only
To this day a division in the academy
because of his influence.
• A voiceless, objective, depersonalized,
naked, natural way of speaking,
mathematical (Smith, p. 214)
In summary. . .
• Both religion and science the same mark on
rhetoric: “There is little need for an art
form that dealt with probabilities.”
• Yet, ironically science deals with
probabilities
The Formula
• Rhetoric
• Enthymemes
• Conclusions
Dialectic
Induction
Evidence
Generalization
Science and Communication
• Today scientists are like witch doctors of
tribal myths
• Genetic determinism (physis) over culture
(nomos)
• Yet, always probablities
Science and Probabilities
• Dialectic=induction
• Rhetoric=example
•
Probabilities
Science, Probabilities (the
curve)and Communication
•
•
•
•
How many sexes are their?
What is intelligence?
Others?
What happens to the data 2 or 3 deviations
from the mean?