Rhetoric - Mastering the Art of Persuasion E-Book

Horst Hanisch

• Herausgeber: Books on Demand
• Kategorie: Ratgeber
• Serie: Rhetorik, Präsentation, Persönlichkeit /englisch)
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2016

Seitenzahl: 186

Beschreibung

From the First Steps to a Perfect Presentation. Here’s all you need to know about modern rhetoric and how to hone both your verbal and non-verbal skills to ensure the success of your next talks, presentations and seminars. Featuring chapters on: • From rhetoric to presentation • From greeting to closing remarks • Structure of the presentation • Communicating with all your senses • From word to coherent sentence • Interaction with the audience • Stage fright and dealing with stress • Selected quotes

Leseprobe

Fore-words ...

in lieu of a fore-word

Man is distinguished by his relatively high intelligence, his specialized craft skills and his differentiated language.

Dtv-Atlas Philosophie, 9th edition, 2001, page 191

In the beginning was the word

Or perhaps not? Weren’t our ancestors more likely word-less? Didn’t the first humans communicate on an unspoken level? After all, a school of fish is able to coordinate its movements without speaking a word. And don’t ants communicate non-verbally as well, through body contact? As a matter of fact, language as we know it has only been around for the last 30,000 to 100,000 years.

And even today, we still cannot express everything with words. Or are you able to explain to your neighbour how a banana tastes? Using the word ‘banana-like’ doesn’t count, because if our neighbour had never eaten a banana, this word would still not help him to imagine what one tastes like.

Some statements still demonstrate the bodily feelings language betrays. For example: “I can’t stand the smell of him”, or “I can’t put my finger on it”. Sometimes words get stuck in our throats, so to speak. And, to make things worse, people even tell us now and again that we shouldn’t take everything so literally (but how should we take it then?)! Incidentally – some people can’t even understand their own words: “I can’t understand a thing I’m saying ...”

So it shouldn’t come as a surprise to us that, as Albert Mehrabian discovered, only 7% of the information conveyed through interpersonal communication comes from spoken words, while 93% comes from the way in which the words are said as well as the body language of the speaker!

Following my standard work on the theme of body language, I will now turn my attention in this book primarily to the topic of the spoken word, exploring verbal communication before an audience. See also my book “Moderating Is Gold”.

Out of the gigantic mass of themes that could be subsumed under the concept of ‘rhetoric’, I have decided in this book to focus on topical aspects and practical applications. Therefore, the field of ‘antique’ rhetoric is only touched on briefly as an introduction to the field. I have rounded out the theme by providing excerpts from actual speeches.

The book is divided into several large sections corresponding with the fundamentals of rhetoric, from ancient times to modern usage.

I would like to ask the reader to forgive me if I go into greater detail on some points and sometimes intersperse my comments with humour. In my opinion, it can do no harm when trying to deal with the wealth of material that accompanies us, or perhaps even relentlessly pursues us, day after day, to take out some time to have a laugh. For example, when I hear sentences like this one: “His wife didn’t have time to go to the store, so he decided to run over himself.” Wonder if he survived the accident?

Since language obviously does not always follow the rules of logic, situations often arise that summon a smile: Has anyone ever said they wanted to have a word with you (and was it really just one word)? Or did someone once give you their word (did she have only one? - And now she doesn’t have any left? - So she is left wordless?). Well okay, then she might as well tell you “You have my word.” (And just where do you have it?). Just recently, someone took me at my word, and I especially like people who hang on my every word, although of course not those who put words in my mouth.

Once in a while, someone offers to put in a good word for me (don’t you ever wonder how they decided which word to choose? - Is that why it’s sometimes necessary to weigh one’s words?). Some of our peers promise to keep their word (where do they keep it? - clutched tightly in their hand?), while others ask to exchange words with us (“What will you give me for the word “carrot”?) Others can’t get a word in edgewise (why not try it head on?), while the next guy seems to think that mum’s the word (Aha – we finally know which one it is!). It seems that a word can be either good or bad: “As good as one’s word.” (What’s so good about it?).

Did you ever hear someone wish they could eat their words? While others were busy mincing their words? Or do you wonder why some folks nod approvingly when words get out of hand, remarking that “those are fighting words”?

Sometimes we are simply at a loss for words. Which makes it seem only logical to me when one spouse says to the other: “The final word has not yet been spoken.” Even today, though, I still haven’t found out which is actually the final word. But, wait a minute, I just remembered another neighbour telling me that his wife always has the last word. (still don’t know which one it is though). “That’s my final word!” Aha.

Supposedly, the 50 most-used words in a language account for some 45 percent of any written text. So are we instead impoverished when it comes to words?

In the face of this illogical nature of language, my own views will necessarily dictate the emphasis placed here on certain issues. And it’s easy to understand why others may not necessarily always share my priorities. In addition, some chapters could certainly bear to be fleshed out a bit more. This is why I am always open to constructive criticism and productive suggestions.

Since actions speak louder than words (even good ones?) I don’t want to miss the opportunity here to thank all the people who offered me mental and physical support in realizing this project. Several students contributed sample presentations; my father, Alfred Hanisch, provided valiant services as editor and adviser; my friend K. Thomas Sturm took care of many daily tasks, allowing me to work withoutstress on this (and other) projects. Nor have I forgotten all of the people, acquaintances and friends who offered me valuable assistance in the form of small tips or major words of advice.

I hope you, dear readers, will not only be able to supplement your knowledge of rhetoric, but will also enjoy reading this book and playing with words. Here’s to harnessing the power of language to make the most of your personal and professional future!

Horst Hanisch

Table of Contents

FORE-WORDS

IN LIEU OF A FORE

-

WORD

In the beginning was the word

CHAPTER 1 – FROM RHETORIC TO PRESENTATION

R

HETORIC FROM

A

NTIQUITY TO THE

P

RESENT

Protagoras and the Sophists

The Rhetor

I

S

R

HETORIC AN

A

RT

?

The School of Athens

The Elenctic Examination (Socratic Method)

The significance of the Sophists

The Platonic Dialogue

Aristotle and logic

Tropes and linguistic ornaments – figures of speech

Stylization (elocutio)

Scholasticism

Thomas Aquinas

Friedrich Hegel and dialectics

MODERN RHETORIC

W

HAT

D

OES

M

ODERN

R

HETORIC

M

EAN

?

The art of speaking

Rhetorical presentation methods

CHAPTER 2 – STAGE FRIGHT AND DEALING WITH STRESS

S

TAGE

F

RIGHT

Nervous before you go on?

The eight cognitive traps

Dealing with Stress – My knees are shaking

Black-outs

What causes stress?

How does the body react to stress?

Anti-stress test

CHAPTER 3 – FROM GREETING TO CLOSING REMARKS

B

EGINNING THE

P

RESENTATION

Options for beginning a presentation correctly – the introduction

Bringing in emotions

Name title and topic? ... Or let the listeners guess?

The goal of the presentation

Should you put your presentation in a frame?

The Main Body – The Security of Structure

The structure of the main body

Length of time

Active Phases and Learning units

The End of the Presentation – The summary

V

ISIONS

Looking toward the future?

Visionaries – From Leonardo da Vinci to Martin Luther King

Feedback

Discussion

Saying Good-Bye / Closing

CHAPTER 4 – SPEECH TRAINING AND PRESENTATION EXERCISES

S

PEECH

T

RAINING

Practicing speaking

Speech and presentation exercises

Speech training before a test audience

Explaining precisely

CHAPTER 5 – INTERACTION WITH THE AUDIENCE

H

OW TO

H

ANDLE

L

ISTENERS

How to handle passive listeners

How to handle active listeners

Listener interaction

Role Play and Other Active Components – but very respectable ones

The listener emphatically (aggressively) supports a different view

To reply to an objection

What is the purpose of the discussion?

CHAPTER 6 – SPEAKING WITH YOUR BODY - BODY LANGUAGE

T

HE

B

ASIC

V

OCABULARY OF

B

ODY

L

ANGUAGE

Language and body language: the 7/93 rule

The ABC’s of body language with regard to

Gestures – When speaking

Involuntary and voluntary gestures

E

YE CONTACT

Look me in the eye

The Duchenne Smile – The ‘true’ smile

The biometric surveillance system

Basic Emotions – From joy to sadness

Does body language lie?

Suggestions for analyzing body language

CHAPTER 7 – FROM WORD TO COHERENT SENTENCE

W

ORDS

,

WORDS

,

WORDS

Word style

The affective resonance of a word

‘Actually’ means ‘actually not’

The Power of Words – Two countries divided by a common language

From letters to scriptures – Forms of handwriting

Words become sentences

Clarification of verbal expressions

Generalizations – “At one time or another, everyone has ...”

Tautology – doubled words

What the language describes - psyche and body

T

HE

E

FFECT OF

O

UR

V

OICE ON

L

ISTENERS

Influence through the voice – suprasegmental traits

Paralinguistic traits

Intonation as tool – semantic prosody

Caesura

The act of speaking – function of language

CHAPTER 8 – COMMUNICATING WITH ALL YOUR SENSES – AND THROUGH BODY LANGUAGE

T

HE

L

ISTENERS

A

RRIVE

The first impression

The self-fulfilling prophecy

Welcoming the participants

H

OW

D

OES

C

OMMUNICATION

W

ORK

?

Physical sensation

The effect of colours – a brief psychology of colour

The Five Senses

Moving images

Subjective truth – Is there only one truth?

Requirements of interpersonal communication

The speech and body language at the podium

CHAPTER 9 – SELECTED QUOTES

Q

UOTES AND

S

AYINGS

It’s good for uneducated people to read collections of quotes

INDEX

Chapter 1 – From Rhetoric to Presentation

Rhetoric from Antiquity to the Present

Know thyself.

Inscription at the Oracle of Delphi

Protagoras and the Sophists

With the end of the Persian Wars, Greece attained great prosperity. People turned their attention to attaining a higher level of education. In a democratic state, citizens are expected to be able to speak articulately and extemporaneously. Thus was born the ‘occupation’ of speech trainer. These peripatetic trainers, who taught elocution and other subjects for money, were collectively termed Sophists, a name derived from the Greek word sophos. People appearing before court in Athens from about 450 BC could not simply hire a lawyer; they had to defend themselves, which is why elocution and rhetoric skills were in such high demand.

The Rhetor

Originally, the word “rhetor” was used to refer to an eloquent orator who spoke before an audience. Later, the rhetor became a ‘teacher of eloquence’. Previously (see above), the rhetoric teacher was known as a ‘sophist’, someone who taught rhetoric and related themes for a fee.

There are two disciplines (forms) that are important for rhetoric:

the linguistic forms

the tone and rhythm of speech

semantics (the science of meaning in language)

syntax (sentence structure)

the logical forms

for example, persuasive argumentation techniques (structures that reveal or conceal the truth). Important here is syllogism, the doctrine of deductive reasoning. A syllogism involves combining two premises to form a third, the conclusion. Example:

Major premise: Humans are mortal.

Minor premise: Mr. Mertens is human.

Conclusion: Thus, Mr. Mertens is mortal.

According to Aristotle, ‘human’ is the ‘middle term’ here.

Is Rhetoric an Art?

There are two sides to every question.

Protagoras, a leading Sophist (around 480 - 410 BC)

The School of Athens

Raffaello Santi (1483 - 1520), commonly known as “Raphael”, was commissioned by Pope Julius II at the age of 25 to paint four walls in the Vatican (the Stanza della Segnatura). One of the frescoes depicted ‘The School of Athens’, showing great thinkers of antiquity.

At the centre of the picture stand Plato, his finger pointing upward (standing for speculative philosophy), and Aristotle (representing empirical philosophy).

Also identifiable in the picture are:

Socrates (470 – 399 BC) (“I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance.”)

Plato (427 – 347 BC, pupil of Socrates); founded the Academy (Akademos), which was closed in 529 by Emperor Justinian.

Aristotle (384 – 322 BC, Plato’s pupil); opened a school (Lykeion). He is regarded as the founder of logic. Aristotle was the teacher of

Alexander the Great (356 – 323 BC) until he ascended the throne in 336 BC

Also shown are:

Pythagoras (580 – 496 BC), the Greek mathematician.

Heraclitus of Ephesus (about 500 BC), who believed that everything in the world is in flux.

Diogenes (403 – 324 BC), a cynic who eschewed all worldly goods and (supposedly) lived in a barrel.

Euclid (about 300 BC), who wrote an influential textbook on geometry.

Ptolemy (around 90 – 160), who wrote a famous handbook of astronomy.

The Elenctic Examination (Socratic Method)

Socrates (around 470 - 399 BC) realized when talking with his peers that many believed they had a great stock of knowledge at their disposal, but that this often turned out to be only pseudo-knowledge. This superficial brand of knowledge does not stand up to the logic of further questioning. Socrates therefore developed a method, which he called the elenctic examination, to show his partner in dialogue that the latter had not yet attained genuine knowledge, but rather merely pseudoknowledge.

Pseudo-knowledge

The examination:

Persuasive presentation

The challenge for the teacher of rhetoric is to persuade listeners of the veracity of any kind of content. He has to be able to logically present the facts, and even to convince listeners that a weakness is actually a strength. Of course, a sentence might be true in one situation and false in another. For example:

Major premise: Humans have two legs.

Minor premise: Mr. Mertens has two legs.

Conclusion: Mr. Mertens is human.

Or:

Major premise: Humans have two legs.

Minor premise: A kangaroo has two legs.

Conclusion: A kangaroo is human.

From this example we can see that there can be no such thing as objective content. The upshot is the famous ‘homo-mensura thesis’ of Protagoras:

“Man is the measure of all things; of what is, that it is, of what is not, that it is not.”

The homo-mensura thesis is considered the heart of sophist thinking:

“The human establishes what is, everything beyond that is rejected (scepticism), and all being is not objective, but rather subjective and changeable (relativism).”

The significance of the Sophists

Although in the Greek philosophy of nature man did not play the decisive role, this view gradually evolved into a more anthropocentric one. Man moved to the centre of philosophical patterns of thought. This is also why verbal – interpersonal – communication, i.e. language, became increasingly important. Spoken language was paramount for the Sophists.

Plato called the drive that always guides humans to the region of true being and the good ‘eros’. It arouses in men the longing to devote themselves to contemplating ideas. In the Symposium this urge is described as the philosophical striving for beauty and knowledge. It takes on a mediating role between the sensual world and the world of the spirit. In our relationships with others, the pedagogical aspect (epiméleia) of this drive is demonstrated in the way we want others to share in our knowledge.

The Platonic Dialogue

Plato calls this process of sharing our knowledge with others a dialogue.

This dialogue, according to Plato, opens the way for us to remember our past. It works based on words and concepts that summon ideas and memories.

In a dialogue, ideas should be presented logically, i.e. without the help of illustrational tools and images. This is known as dialectics. At the same time, the interrelationships of these ideas should become clear to us.

Aristotle and logic

Aristotle lived from 384 to 324 BC. He was a pupil of Plato for over 20 years. In 342 he became the teacher of Alexander the Great.

The syllogism plays an essential role in his teachings. A chain of several related conclusions is one way of providing proof. This method is called deductive, because it progresses from the general to the specific.

In Aristotle’s opinion, one of the goals of science should be to compellingly derive what exists from its causes.

The opposite of deduction is induction. Induction searches for common features within a type.

The system of status

Courts of law in particular worked with the system of Status constitutio, dealing with the point that was being contested. In accordance with Hermagoras, the system is constructed as follows:

Genus rationale (area of argumentation)

1

st

status (status coniecturalis)

is the suspicion (who is the perpetrator?)

Charge made by the accuser

“No” – denial of charge by defendant

2

nd

status (status definitius)

is the definition (what is the offence?)

Charge made by the accuser

“Yes, but a milder category of offence.” - Admission by the defendant. However, from the point of view of the defendant, the charge is only justified

in part

.

3

rd

status (status qualitatis)

is the nature of the offence (what is the justification?). We distinguish here between absolute justification (constitutio iuridicialis absoluta) and relative justification (constitutio iuridicialis assumptiva).

Absolute justification

Charge made by the accuser

“Yes, but the crime was justified.” - Admission by the defendant. However, from the point of view of the defendant, the offence was justified.

Relative justification

Charge made by the accuser

“Yes, but ...” - Admission by the defendant.

Confession (concessio): From the point of view of the defendant, it was a case of not knowing the law or of force majeure, which to his mind justified the crime.

Charges are commuted (translatio criminis): The defendant believes that he is the victim. He is convinced of having acted in self-defence, so that he believes the crime was justified.

Charges are dismissed (remotio criminis): From the point of view of the defendant, he was just acting on orders, i.e. instructions from a third person. He was unable to – and should not have – acted any differently. He therefore argues that he is innocent.

Comparison (comparatio): From the point of view of the defendant, committing the deed was better than not committing it. He had to act as he did. He therefore believes he is innocent.

4

th

status (translatio)

is the commutation (rejection of the charge)

Charge made by the accuser

“You don’t have the right to accuse me!” The defendant is of the opinion that the accusing body (for example, the court) has no jurisdiction over him.

Genus legale (controlling the interpretation of legal texts)

Four categories are distinguished here:

1

st

category (scriptum sententia) wording and meaning

The written word does not correspond with the meaning to be conveyed.

2

nd

category (leges contrariae) contradictory laws

Various laws are played off against one another.

3

rd

category (ambiguitas) ambiguity

Various interpretations are possible of the same legal text.

4

th

category (ratiocinatio) reasoning, conclusion by analogy

There is a legal loophole.

Tropes and linguistic ornaments – figures of speech

In antiquity, rhetoric experts distinguished between tropes (locutions) and linguistic ornamentation, and between rhetorical figures of speech in three categories (adding words, omitting words or changing word order) and so forth.

In a trope, one word is exchanged for another, or used to mean something different. In a figure, the word retains its meaning, but other words are added to create a figure of speech. Since at this point, however, it already becomes difficult to distinguish between the two, for simplicity’s sake we will call all of these possibilities figures of speech. Later on in this book, some examples of figures of speech will be listed.

Constructions

The constructions listed below were important in ancient rhetoric. Today they can be used, or avoided as the case may be, at the speaker’s discretion.

Arrangement (ordo)

The speech should pick up ‘power’ as it goes along.

“The points addressed should encourage listeners to think about them and challenge them to take action on them.”

“I see the catastrophe before me, yes, I can even still hear the screams of the afflicted.”

Connection (iunctura)

Avoidance of cacophony (the last letter in a word should not be the same as the first letter in the next)

“An insightfuL lectureR renderS severaL lessonS successfully ...”

Rhythm (numerus)

Similarly sounding syllables should not be used in the same sentence.

“Sally sells seashells by the seashore.”

Stylization (elocutio)

In ancient times, experts on rhetoric differentiated between four stylistic qualities.

The four stylistic qualities

The four antique styles

Antique rhetoric distinguished between four styles of speaking, depending on the type of speech to be given and the occasion.

plain style

When something should be presented simply. Can be used anytime, conversational tone.

medium style