Blog Post #1

Aristotle’s approach to rhetoric is what I agree with the most. His belief is that “only scientific demonstration and the analysis of formal logic can arrive at absolute truth” (p. 170). This approach makes the most sense to me. Plato believes that we are born with knowledge, but I believe that knowledge is learned not just known. The Sophists used rhetoric as a way to persuade. Although I do agree with their approach of looking at the situation and arguing different avenues, I think that would lead to absolute truth. The Sophists, on the other hand, did not believe that absolute truth can be reached.   

Aristotle “treats rhetoric as legitimately appealing to the whole person, not just to the ‘rational being’” (p.175). This further proves how Aristotle believes in the scientific proof to pass along knowledge. One had to fully see the truth rather than just listening and believing what was told to them. “Further - one should be able to persuade, just as to reason strictly, on both sides of a question; not with a view to using the twofold power…” (p. 67). Aristotle believed the Sophists used rhetoric to simply persuade people to believe what they believed. Whereas Aristotle saw rhetoric as a way to get to true knowledge by scientific proof and analysis. He believed in looking at all views on the subject in order to find the absolute truth. Being able to see all sides of subject makes it possible for the person to see what they believe the truth to be.