can someone tell me the difference between prejudial and non-prejudial use of rhetoric?
Posted by Ms. Sue on Tuesday, June 20, 2006 at 9:47am.
Check these sites to help you answer your question.
(Broken Link Removed)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric
-----------------------
Posted by Ms. Sue on Monday, July 10, 2006 at 6:25pm.
Check this site.
http://www.jessanderson.org/doc/rr_lingo.html
----------------------
http://www.jiskha.com/display.cgi?id=1157494639.1157499174
Posted by PsyDAG on Tuesday, September 5, 2006 at 7:32pm.
Although prejudice is often defined as a negative attitude, we all have prejudices (biases) toward almost everything we consider. Differences occur in terms of how extreme our bias is and how much it influences our actions - including our language. If we are aware of our biases, we can often minimize them.
I will give you some sources dealing with influencing others, but, since rhetorical devices are not in my area of expertise, I will leave it to you to relate the material to them.
http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/InfluenceAntecedents.html
http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/InfluenceMorePrinciples.html
http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/InfluenceStillMore.html
http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/MeanNewsMedia.html
http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/Persuasion.html
http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/QuestionFrame.html
This site will give you the problems with prejudicial rhetoric.
http://epochewiki.pbwiki.com/PburghClarkFinalProposal
The following comes from Answer.com
First, lets look at what the word rhetoric means.
rhet·o·ric (rtr-k)
n.
1.
a. The art or study of using language effectively and persuasively.
b. A treatise or book discussing this art.
2. Skill in using language effectively and persuasively.
3.
a. A style of speaking or writing, especially the language of a particular subject: fiery political rhetoric.
b. Language that is elaborate, pretentious, insincere, or intellectually vacuous: His offers of compromise were mere rhetoric.
4. Verbal communication; discourse.
Now, lets say, I am a staunch anti bubble gum lobbyist. In my rhetoric, I preach against bubble gum arguing (1) it causes bad teeth threw excessive sugar as well as continued pull of the teeth by the gum itself. (2) it is too noisy and disruptive when chewed by teenagers. (3) it is too messy and dangerous when chewed by younger children. They swallow it, they forget to take it out of their mouths at night and it winds up in their hair and one their clothes or bed sheets.
All bubble gum should be banned! (This is an example of prejudicial rhetoric.
A non-prejudicial use of rhetoric would be for example arguing the republican position on minimum wage increases versus the democrats position on the same subject. The republican position is that a rise in the minimum wage will be a disadvantage and burden on small business. The democrats state that it has been years since the minimum wage has risen and that low income wage earners need this rise. The truth of the matter is that there are very few jobs in the US that are paying as low as the current minimum wage.
Hope that somewhat helps with your understanding of this subject.
Prejudicial use of rhetoric refers to the use of language that is biased or discriminatory and aims to persuade others based on prejudice or bias. On the other hand, non-prejudicial use of rhetoric refers to the use of language that is fair, unbiased, and aims to persuade others based on logical reasoning and evidence.
To fully understand the difference between prejudicial and non-prejudicial use of rhetoric, you can consult the following sources provided by Ms. Sue and PsyDAG:
- The Wikipedia page on rhetoric (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric) provides a general overview of rhetoric and its different aspects.
- The website jessanderson.org (http://www.jessanderson.org/doc/rr_lingo.html) offers a guide to understanding rhetorical terms and concepts.
- For a deeper understanding of how biases and prejudices can influence language, you can refer to the sources provided by PsyDAG:
- InfluenceAntecedents (http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/InfluenceAntecedents.html)
- InfluenceMorePrinciples (http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/InfluenceMorePrinciples.html)
- InfluenceStillMore (http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/InfluenceStillMore.html)
- MeanNewsMedia (http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/MeanNewsMedia.html)
- Persuasion (http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/Persuasion.html)
- QuestionFrame (http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/QuestionFrame.html)
- The site epochewiki.pbwiki.com (http://epochewiki.pbwiki.com/PburghClarkFinalProposal) provides information specifically on the problems with prejudicial rhetoric.
Additionally, the provided examples can help illustrate the difference between prejudicial and non-prejudicial use of rhetoric:
- Prejudicial use of rhetoric: An example is a person opposing bubble gum, using biased arguments that exaggerate the negative effects of bubble gum and advocating for a complete ban without considering other perspectives.
- Non-prejudicial use of rhetoric: An example is a debate on minimum wage increases between Republicans and Democrats, where each side presents their arguments based on different perspectives and supporting evidence.
By studying these sources and examples, you will gain a better understanding of the difference between prejudicial and non-prejudicial use of rhetoric.