Hi John, That is certainly one purpose of rhetoric, however, I would put that into the class of "Poetry" which although rhetoric itself, is not meant to convince.. I was thinking more of rhetoric as the Sophists used before Socrates came along and talked about Truth and Beauty. Or maybe that was Plat making up what Socrates said. The thing about the great orators, is that they did not write things down. I'm thinking of the likes of Jesus, Socrates, Buddha, and Lao Tsu (who only wrote a very few words that are still being interpreted when he was asked to on his way out of the gate of the library to get away from all the human madness).
Back to rhetoric. I believe that Pirsig (or Phaedrus if you will) was using that term to express the difference between eloquent talking (rhetoric), and the rigid use of Truth (dialectic). Now, Plato's Socrates was obviously the latter, although my guess is that the true Socrates was the former. Socrates was a Sophist through and through. He wasn't going to let anyone change his mind (not even a snake in the grass). Of course all these great idea men came around at exactly at the time when the Annunaki (or Nefilim) left Earth for the last time. But I digress. So Yin (DQ) and Yang (sq) are always at play. I would say that DQ creates words, but words in turn create DQ. White turning to black, and back to white again. As with the Yin, DQ will always be the stronger force (ie. Good against Evil, or Satan against God (respectively)). Poetry certainly creates an atmosphere of DQ for me, anyway. I think I am just saying the same thing you are now that I read your last paragraph in this reread. Hyena Mark. On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Joseph Maurer <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Mark and All, > > It seems to me the purpose of rhetoric is to put perceptions into words. > The process of creating and using words is a learned process of moving from > an emotional apprehension of DQ perceptions which is an individual emotional > activity to a conceptual intellectual activity. > > If done well rhetoric would trigger an indefinable emotional response in > another which he then would express in his own words indicating how his > response followed the source for his actions even if the words were not the > same. > > Joe > > > On 8/14/11 9:31 AM, "118" <[email protected]> wrote: > > <snip> >> Mark: >> Yes, I agree, sharing gives the illusion of sharing. The purpose of >> rhetoric is to convince or subvert someone else's will. > <snip> > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
