Reflective Post 1

            Of the three theories we have covered thus far, I think that my developing definition is most in line with the basic tenets of Aristotle.  For me, rhetoric is simply a tool utilized by anyone wishing to convey some sort of message to someone else.  It can, is, and should be used by people from any and all fields, in any and all situations.  Aristotle believes that everyone uses it in “the effort of examining and submitting inquiry” and that it isn’t limited to a particular field (Rhetoric of Western Thought, 67).  He also criticized earlier rhetoricians for things like their focus on appeals to emotion and stress on use in legal realms (Rhetoric of Western Thought, 67).  These are all criticisms that I hold as well. 

His reasoning behind use of dialectics is also something that I liked above that of Plato; he believed that it’s use should be to “know the whole state of the case” and that it enables one to refute the opposition (Rhetoric of Western Thought, 67).  Something that I think is especially important to rhetoric is that it is useful to all of society, not just in arguing semantics or philosophy.  It can be used to provide solutions to problems we may run into in life.  Aristotle also believed that one of the functions rhetoric can serve is “to explore solutions to practical problems” (Rhetorical Tradition, 170).  Though I may not fully align myself with his theories, the core of my definition lines up very well with parts of his.