In today’s modern age originally, Aristotle defined rhetoric by any way of persuasion while appealing to emotion. Aristotle defines rhetoric as the counterpart of dialectic. A more definitive description of rhetoric is using symbolisms as a method of persuasion to clarify or an understanding. How Aristotle defines rhetoric leaves many ways to find possibilities to persuade others. He states rhetoric is clearly planned out, requiring thought and planning. Using rhetoric as a clear way for people to make choices is very present in the digital age of today. When people use rhetoric with language, rhetoric is always used to interpret the message. Rhetoric is planned by know which audience it will be attentive to. This connects links between the audience and the speaker’s views.
Rhetoric was originated in Athens and it was primarily used to persuade large groups of people to vote a certain way on legislation. The first people to teach about rhetoric were called Sophists. They built their teachings off of arguments and how to make a weak argument better. Doing this would make it easier to persuade if a person developed and mastered the techniques and proved to very useful. When rhetoric was first being practiced it was only used in three kinds of arts; political, legal and ceremonial. With logos, pathos, and ethos being the types of ways a speaker can express themselves. Logos introduced a logical argument to the speech. Pathos appealed to emotions and ethos was the establishing the authority of the orator. Aristotle broke down a process of speech into five areas:
- Invention, this was a way to the research to find the best way to come up with a persuasive argument.
- Arrangement is organizing the structure of the speech.
- Using style such as proper language for the audience, knowing your audience.
- Memory, by using mnemonic techniques to get one’s brain to remember important information for a speech.
- Delivery is the fifth stage. This stage is very important and takes practice to hone. Gestures and voice projection are very important to a speech. Sounding monotone would be a bad example of delivery.
During the Medieval times while Christianity had risen rhetoric died down because it was looked at as unethical. At this point in time the element of rhetoric that was studied the most would have to be style. It was later used as a way to persuade in churches. Unfortunately; rhetoric was also used at this time for deception. Rhetoric was practiced unethically and still is today. Rhetoric is also looked at not just a bunch of word put together but using knowledge and beliefs to assist in persuasion. This method of describing rhetoric is interesting because it does not focus on the mechanics of a speech. It focuses more on persuading the audience. This can also work not only with speeches but anything you read online.
Visual rhetoric and digital rhetoric have many things in common. Computers and the internet create a lot of visuals. Visual rhetoric is going to use many avenues to capture ones attention. The primary objective of digital rhetoric means it must be digital in reaching the audience. Look at digital rhetoric as it is either on or off like a computer. It has to be in the electronic form to be present. When your logged into a social media account that visual and digital rhetoric is mostly noticeable by way of either a hyperlink or picture with something to catch your attention. Now the multi-billion dollar companies are able to see what you are searching for on the internet and are able to place things you may be highly interested in right in your feeds. If you are looking for an item such as a men’s wallet online and you do further research on whether it’s a minimal wallet or etc. You will start to see striking images of what your research was. Digital information is built to stream coded information at a fast pace. The first signs of digital rhetoric and visual go back to the Aztecs and Mayans. They were creating pictures and telling stories using hieroglyphics and codes. This is the oldest form of what some may argue digital rhetoric. Digital communications helps bridge the gap between messages a writer or an orator have to deliver.
Andrea Lunsford is a teacher and Stanford University and has reviewed thousands of papers. Lunsford said “I think were in the midst of a literacy revolution the likes we haven’t seen since the Greek revolution.” She believes in this modern age of rhetoric writing is encouraged more in relation to digital formats. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram are loaded with digital rhetoric. Anywhere you can put in any type of persuasion then rhetoric is there. A video of a car getting in an accident is not rhetorical, but take the same video with overlays of words blaming the driver or manufacturer on something that is not certain and based off assumptions can be rhetoric. If only part of a video shows what the person wants you to see is digital rhetoric. These kinds of methods are used daily on social media. Computerized humanities are used as a sort of catch-all portrayal for an exceptionally wide scope of methodologies and techniques that include utilization of advanced innovations to think about humanities subjects. The more typical utilization of “computerized” speaks to the encoding of data in digits, which may possess just two particular states. This is the fundamental innovation that makes conceivable electronic interchanges, composing on personal computers, and through systems. There is more of the computerized to advise us that while advancements are take into consideration a significantly more prominent group of media and without a doubt a greater office in recording, transporting, modifying, and remixing a wide range of writings, we shouldn’t dismiss the association between what might be viewed as an absolutely new approach or development and the narratives of speech that go before our electronic world.
The advanced/simple refinement is, to me, more beneficial than contradicting electronic and non-electronic types of composing (subsequently “computerized talk” not “electric” or “electronic” talk); seeing the computerized in this notable casing encourages us to set the employments of traditional talk for computerized interchanges (in the contemporary sense) — if composing has dependably been advanced written work, at that point in a few respects, talk has dependably likewise been computerized talk. This approach likewise features the connectedness of the computerized to its material foundation and, by expansion, the encapsulation of human rhetors who utilize advanced structures. It is important for advancements in communication to not dismiss the frameworks of organized frameworks, electronic gadgets, and computerized writings. Falling the qualifications amongst “genuine” and “virtual” is basic not just as far as new interfaces, wearables, and pervasive figuring, yet additionally to help us to remember less specialized parts of advanced talk, for example, control connections, work practices of producers and clients, and the distinctions of race, sexual orientation, and capacity that computerized talk must record for in the event that it is to abstain from developing a perfect client as the target group for powerful employments of innovation. Our bodies likewise dwell inside social, physical, computerized, and social systems. If the chance that we consider epitome to be a key routine with regards to advanced talk, we can likewise more promptly observe the forces and impacts not simply of computerized, electronic systems, but rather how these social and social frameworks assume a part.
We can see improvement being made as far as extending what has up to this point been a Western-driven way to deal with computerized talk I would say that a present and noteworthy problem still exists as far as associating computerized talk control differentials at play for contrastingly exemplified clients; generally little work is now highlighted around issues of race, class, sex, or inability as particularly arranged inside an advanced talk setting, It is important for the field to advance activities that address these people. In today’s politics this is where you really see opponents attack each other online or television ads. As a sort of perfect representation of the worry for keeping the body at the front line of work in advanced talk is the subject of whether frameworks that need bodies would themselves be able to fill in as crowds, expository messages, or even speakers in their own particular right.
The ways rhetoric is being used today goes beyond persuasion. Strategies are developed for companies to gear towards consumers. Along with many different rhetorical forms online is also rhetorical discourse and political campaigning which will be discussed later. Ian Bogust (2007) created the idea to challenge digital rhetoric. He argues that a new form of rhetoric should be developed for producing analytic methods. He came up with a method called procedural rhetoric. This process is used to find new rhetoric. Procedurality is way to create the method for things to work. This process can be seen as in normal types of argument. Verbal rhetoric beneficial to a speaker and audiences. Written rhetoric is great to a writer and readers and procedural rhetoric is something we would find in video games or platforms. The easiest way to break down the difference in rhetoric of visual and verbal is visual is by using items such as ads and videos. Verbal is where we would speeches will come into play. Today’s rhetoric uses rhetorical discourse every day. Weather it is for ceremonies for political. Political rhetoric is put out to the world in mass to reach as many people as possible. Aristotle’s three techniques are still present in today’s rhetoric; deliberative, forensic and epideictic. After hearing all of this it makes a person wonder if everything around them is rhetoric. I feel it is and always will be. With technology growing stronger it is more in our face every day. Computer based networks are the backbone of being able to communicate today. The word digital is a technical term for technology but is not limited to computers. Writing in general is digital communication. While advanced education is a prerequisite for utilizing computerized talk visual talk is a case of a discrete arrangement of strategies that are accessible to use inside the computerized talk setting.
Computerized rhetoric has the expression “new media” has been the subject of contending understandings and definitions. Most methodologies consider new media a portrayal of a specific sort of protest despite the fact that there have been some more chances to utilize new media as a sort of self-reflective term for the investigation of new media questions too. We see more rhetoric digitally as political elections come around. The talk utilized by people is not just about the on the grounds that it shapes open understandings. People who want power and run for office draw on and know how to abuse a profound well of relatively programmed reactions by an open saturated with a culture that has come to see military power as the establishment for national quality. There is much to say in relation to a political culture. It is hundreds of years long confidence in the political nature of viciousness, the conviction that a political race is dirty and an eagerness to utilize whatever methods important to ensure the power for the country. Besides, politicians who seek to the most powerful office of the greatest country with the world’s greatest military have likely effectively obtained the ideological essentials for the activity. The aspiration to end up president involves an acknowledgment that there is a detailed, regulated power structure inside which they should move.
What’s missing here is the advancement of accumulations of new social materials that are “conceived computerized” and the improvement of techniques and systems for both contemplating and creating these new structures. I speculate that as the domain of advanced humanities develops, there will be a solid turn toward this path, and I would propose that computerized talk is all around situated to take part in and add to the advanced humanities when it does as such. An extra concern originates from the situation of talk versus the humanities all the more as a rule. Verifiably, the main regimen train of the humanities is talk, yet talk never again seems to have an unmistakable way of life as a teach and is regularly neglected as the establishment of the humanities. Digital talk gives a chance to recover not only the disregarded groups of memory and conveyance, however to take after crafted by contemporary rhetoricians who have been endeavoring to recuperate the full intensity of talk and stake out a more grounded assert inside the proceeding with development of computerized humanities. There are positively ways that advanced talk can take part in the computerized humanities close by abstract investigations and history, yet computerized talk additionally has much to offer what might as well be called the computerized humanities, which is for the most part assigned “Web contemplates.” Web examines rose up out of the fields of PC bolstered helpful work, human science, and interchanges.
Barry Wellman, one of the most punctual supporters for applying an interpersonal organization approach to the Internet, follows the beginnings of the field to around 1994 and isolates the main decade of its history into three “ages” speculating the Internet; precise documentation of clients and utilizations; and genuine examination situated in hypothetically determined undertakings. To date, I have not seen advanced talk making numerous advances in the meetings and diaries of Internet thinks about. Be that as it may, there is a rich assemblage of work that can add to computerized talk, especially regarding strategies and procedures. In the meantime, long range interpersonal communication hypothesis is comparable with an advanced talk way to deal with the investigation of arranged correspondence, so there is additionally a chance to associate at the level of hypothesis too. I end this section, at that point, with a charge to those of us who describe our work as computerized talk — we should work to bring our hypotheses and techniques into the fields of the advanced humanities and Internet contemplates in light of the fact that we have much to offer in the two domains; we likewise have phenomenal chances to gain from and consolidate the work that is integral to these fields too.
Taking everything into account, it is obvious to see the positive and negative effects that innovation has had and will have on our comprehension of talk. With steady changes, it can just show signs of improvement or more awful in any zone. Conveyance strategies for lessons and directions are changing, visual symbolism is molding the way we think and act, and out dialect generally has developed to fit the circumstances in a manner of speaking. Talk has experienced a few developments all through time which all have had a noteworthy impact in the way things are done by and by. This is apparent in our political structure, religion, instruction, common issues thus substantially more. More so than previously, talk has taken a noteworthy change in our innovation time as individuals are moving increasingly far from the time of books and writing and significantly more into compact media gadgets, photography, web based life, short messaging. And so forth the level of impact of talk on our general public is perpetually evolving.