Consider the following prejudicial rhetorical devices:
o SUVs are apartment homes on wheels (a rhetorical definition).
o Said by a student who is new to honors classes and struggling with them: €•I would have aced that test if I weren’t in a class full of brainiacs. They studied too much and ruined the curve! (a rhetorical explanation)
· Post your response to the following: How can a person distinguish between the prejudicial and nonprejudicial use of rhetorical devices? Provide an example of each
I need to answer this question on How can a person distinguish between the prejudical and nonprejudidcial use of rhetorical devices? Proide and example of each. I need the answers to these questions today(05-26-2010). Can someone please help me out. Thank you.
To distinguish between the prejudicial and nonprejudicial use of rhetorical devices, it is important to consider the intent and impact of the statements. Prejudicial use of rhetorical devices involves the use of language or devices that are biased, discriminatory, or designed to manipulate emotions, leading to negative judgments or unfair treatment of individuals or groups. On the other hand, nonprejudicial use of rhetorical devices involves the use of language or devices for persuasive communication without promoting bias or discrimination.
Example of Prejudicial Use:
SUVs are apartment homes on wheels (a rhetorical definition)
In this statement, the use of a simile compares SUVs to apartment homes on wheels. The implication is that SUVs are unnecessarily large and luxurious, which could be seen as a negative judgment. This is a prejudicial use because it employs an exaggerated comparison to elicit negative feelings towards SUVs and potentially stigmatizes those who drive them.
Example of Nonprejudicial Use:
"I would have aced that test if I weren't in a class full of brainiacs. They studied too much and ruined the curve!" (a rhetorical explanation)
In this statement, the speaker attributes their own struggle or inability to perform well on a test to the high level of competence among their classmates. The use of the term "brainiacs" is not inherently prejudicial, as it simply refers to highly intelligent individuals. However, if the intention is to belittle or unfairly judge their classmates based on their intelligence, then it becomes prejudicial. If the intention is simply to express frustration or disappointment, it can be seen as a nonprejudicial use of rhetoric.
To distinguish between the two, it is vital to examine the speaker's intent, the underlying message conveyed by the rhetoric, and the potential impact on individuals or groups. Prejudicial use will often involve language that perpetuates stereotypes, generalizations, or harmful biases, while nonprejudicial use will focus on the merits of the argument or persuasive techniques that do not target specific individuals or groups.