Aristotle's theory

Full Answer Section

        Comparison:

• Focus:Aristotle's Rhetoric emphasizes speaker-centric elements, while social judgment theory and ELM focus on the audience's perspective and processing of the message.
• Mechanism:Aristotle's Rhetoric focuses on appeals, while social judgment theory focuses on the audience's existing beliefs and attitudes, and ELM explores different processing routes.
• Scope:Aristotle's theory is more general, while social judgment theory and ELM are more specific, focusing on the cognitive and psychological processes of persuasion.

2. Major Criticisms of Aristotle's Rhetoric:

• Focus on eloquence:Critics argue that Aristotle's focus on eloquence and delivery style can be seen as manipulative and deceptive.
• Limited scope:The theory is criticized for its narrow focus on public speaking and its neglect of other forms of communication.
• Ethical concerns:Aristotle's emphasis on persuasion through appeals can be interpreted as prioritizing effectiveness over ethical considerations.
• Static view of communication:The theory is criticized for its static view of communication, neglecting the dynamic nature of the communication process and the influence of context.

Most Damaging Criticism: The most damaging criticism is the potential for manipulation and deception. While Aristotle emphasizes the importance of ethical communication, his focus on persuasion through appeals can be misused to manipulate audiences.

3. Burke's Perspective by Incongruity vs. Aristotle's Metaphor:

• Aristotle's Metaphor:Emphasizes the use of metaphors to create vivid imagery and connect with the audience's emotions.
• Burke's Perspective by Incongruity:Suggests that metaphors create a sense of "incongruity" or "surprise," which challenges the audience's existing perceptions and compels them to reconsider their views.

Comparison:

• Focus:While both theories acknowledge the power of metaphor, Burke's approach emphasizes the role of incongruity and surprise in provoking thought.
• Effect:Aristotle focuses on the emotional impact of metaphor, while Burke highlights its cognitive impact, forcing audiences to question their assumptions.
• Application:Both theories can be applied to rhetoric, but Burke's perspective emphasizes the importance of challenging existing perspectives and provoking critical thinking.

4. Burke's Identification and Persuasion:

• Identification:Burke argues that persuasion relies on creating a sense of "identification" between the speaker and the audience. This shared ground enables the speaker to connect with the audience on a personal level and make their arguments more persuasive.
• Importance:Identification is crucial for persuasion because it helps to overcome the natural barriers between people, creating a sense of empathy and understanding. When people identify with the speaker, they are more likely to accept their arguments and be persuaded by their message.

Conclusion: While Aristotle's Rhetoric remains a cornerstone of persuasion theory, its limitations and the criticisms it faces highlight the need for more nuanced and context-sensitive approaches to understanding persuasion. Contemporary theories like social judgment theory and the elaboration likelihood model offer valuable insights into the cognitive and psychological processes involved in persuasion. Burke's emphasis on identification, alongside his perspective on incongruity, further underscores the importance of understanding the audience's perspectives and creating a sense of shared meaning in persuasive communication.    

Sample Answer

       

Comparing Aristotle's Rhetoric to Other Theories of Influence

1. Aristotle's Rhetoric, Social Judgment Theory, and the Elaboration Likelihood Model:

• Aristotle's Rhetoric: Focuses on the speaker's ability to persuade the audience through logical appeals (logos), emotional appeals (pathos), and ethical appeals (ethos). It emphasizes the importance of audience analysis, message construction, and delivery style.

• Social Judgment Theory: Explores how people make judgments about persuasive messages based on their existing beliefs and attitudes. It suggests that people are more likely to accept messages that fall within their "latitude of acceptance" and reject those outside of it.

• Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM): Proposes two routes to persuasion: central and peripheral. The central route involves careful processing of the message and its arguments, while the peripheral route relies on cues like source credibility or emotional appeals.