Page 165 - Gabrijela Kišiček and Igor Ž. Žagar (eds.), What do we know about the world? Rhetorical and argumentative perspectives, Digital Library, Educational Research Institute, Ljubljana 2013
P. 165
rhetoric of crisis: polish parliamentarian
debates on the future of the eu 165
the case that is the most advantageous to the sender (Walton, 2007: 275).
Charles Stevenson was the one who developed that notion by paying at-
tention to the specific emotional and descriptive dimensions of words.
In the persuasive definition we focus on the emotional effect that the
given word produces. Hence precious are the metaphors here, which
have the ability to invoke emotional associations.
Naturally we may ponder the effectiveness of identifying the per-
suasive definitions, since strong arguments can be mustered in favour of
the view that all definitions are persuasive. They are always biased, after
all, since they depend on the choice of which species properties we will
define as distinctive. Both Cicero (1942: II, 109) and Quintilian (2005:
VII, 3, 15–18) stated that since the use of the definition serves a defi-
nite purpose, in consequence it is always partial to a degree, and since
its objective, first of all, is to convince the listeners, it must contain some
emotional and narrative elements. It is the common sense that provides
the liminal condition here. It is worth remembering that Cicero wrote
about three means of persuasion; that what matters is 1. That we prove
that what we defend is true, 2. That we convince those that are listen-
ing to us, 3. That we direct their emotions in a way that supports our
cause, ”the proof of our allegations, the winning of our hearers’ favour,
and the rousing of their feelings to whatever impulse our cause may re-
quire” (Cicero, 1942: II, 1152). And the use of emotions is a key factor in
identifying a given definition as a persuasive one.
Persuasive definitions used in the language of politics bring with
them extremely important legal or financial consequences. The change
of the definition in the law results in the change of the qualification of
the deed, as it is shown in the case of analysis of the term of rape (Zaref-
ski, 2006) or wetland (Schiappa, 2003). Therefore persuasive definitions
should not be treated as unimportant language tricks, since they are one
of the most powerful instruments of politics (Walton, 2007: 281). In ad-
dition those definitions span bridges between facts and values. In the
case of the persuasive definition words happen to be the effects of the
speaker’s intention, their objective is therefore the change of the situa-
tion through the transformation of the receivers’ attitudes.
Summing up then, in the rhetorical situation words are the effects of
circumstances, it is the situation that influences the rhetorical choices of
the speaker. In the interactive definition of the situation to the contra-
ry – it is words, i.e. the naming of the reality, that is the cause of the new
situation created. It is worth remembering that the way of perceiving
the reality and its interpretation does not happen out of nowhere. There
debates on the future of the eu 165
the case that is the most advantageous to the sender (Walton, 2007: 275).
Charles Stevenson was the one who developed that notion by paying at-
tention to the specific emotional and descriptive dimensions of words.
In the persuasive definition we focus on the emotional effect that the
given word produces. Hence precious are the metaphors here, which
have the ability to invoke emotional associations.
Naturally we may ponder the effectiveness of identifying the per-
suasive definitions, since strong arguments can be mustered in favour of
the view that all definitions are persuasive. They are always biased, after
all, since they depend on the choice of which species properties we will
define as distinctive. Both Cicero (1942: II, 109) and Quintilian (2005:
VII, 3, 15–18) stated that since the use of the definition serves a defi-
nite purpose, in consequence it is always partial to a degree, and since
its objective, first of all, is to convince the listeners, it must contain some
emotional and narrative elements. It is the common sense that provides
the liminal condition here. It is worth remembering that Cicero wrote
about three means of persuasion; that what matters is 1. That we prove
that what we defend is true, 2. That we convince those that are listen-
ing to us, 3. That we direct their emotions in a way that supports our
cause, ”the proof of our allegations, the winning of our hearers’ favour,
and the rousing of their feelings to whatever impulse our cause may re-
quire” (Cicero, 1942: II, 1152). And the use of emotions is a key factor in
identifying a given definition as a persuasive one.
Persuasive definitions used in the language of politics bring with
them extremely important legal or financial consequences. The change
of the definition in the law results in the change of the qualification of
the deed, as it is shown in the case of analysis of the term of rape (Zaref-
ski, 2006) or wetland (Schiappa, 2003). Therefore persuasive definitions
should not be treated as unimportant language tricks, since they are one
of the most powerful instruments of politics (Walton, 2007: 281). In ad-
dition those definitions span bridges between facts and values. In the
case of the persuasive definition words happen to be the effects of the
speaker’s intention, their objective is therefore the change of the situa-
tion through the transformation of the receivers’ attitudes.
Summing up then, in the rhetorical situation words are the effects of
circumstances, it is the situation that influences the rhetorical choices of
the speaker. In the interactive definition of the situation to the contra-
ry – it is words, i.e. the naming of the reality, that is the cause of the new
situation created. It is worth remembering that the way of perceiving
the reality and its interpretation does not happen out of nowhere. There
