Renaissance And Enlightenment

Blair and Games wanted to grow the appreciation for British literature, and Campbell wanted to give the appropriate insights of side philosophy (peg 170). Yet, Britain, during this time was growing as an empire in the world, and wanted to be recognized for its language ND institutions they made, to be equal to all of Europe. George Campbell recreate in the scientific site of hot air of a humans mind, is close to Plats speculations about psyche in which each part gives out its own rhetoric (peg. 184). Whitely saw that rhetoric would be the center of arguments.He felt that rhetoric would dominate in arguments that involved concerns and skills (174). Belletristic Movements, however, were interested in the language of rhetoric, much the likes of Georgia and Longings. The 18th century sees rhetoric at the head of educational concerns. Going through chapter 8 of the textbook, it appears that rhetoric really never died out. It Just evolved into the near phase that it was needed in. Yet, we see still, that rhetoric is still studied Just as the people in Greece apply it. It has become apparent that no military issue how rhetoric changes, people still use rhetoric as it was intended.These people are Just merely trying to find ways to enhance its abilities so it eject be used throughout the country, and be shared with others. Warwick indicates that rhetoric shifts from producing public discourse, to enhancing its consumption (peg. 184). Rhetoric, during the time of the renaissance, was used as a subject of remove (peg 160). During this period, rhetoric was how people were educated. There was a movement ben as the Italian Humanism, that helped with rhetorics influence between 1300 and 1750 (peg 50). Rhetoric was given attention by all beta(p) figure like, Patriarch and Villa.Due to their attention to this subject it grew the status of rhetoric immensely, because of their status in society. These people used rhetoric as a way to argue against philosophical think ing. Going back to Humanism it mixed principles from Christianity. It led to a search for new education. They ended up apply rhetoric as a way to question the status quo (153). Patriarch, was one and only(a) of many figures during the renaissance, who used rhetoric to refine culture. Rhetoric raised to a place of high importance by humanists because of what rhetoric was capable of doing.It gave the potential to give new insight and it was able to preserve future values (160). Due to Cicerones findings, Patriarch was big in liberalist arts, and the life of political involvement. Rhetoric was able to help form an effective government during the renaissance. The renaissance, was probably the most substantial time for rhetoric. It was at its peak and used by public figures everywhere. There was never a greater time for rhetoric because it was used in importance, such(prenominal) as education, probably the most important subject of all.Also, as the book states, rhetoric was used in m ore political terms like Cicero attempted to do. Thanks to the renaissance, rhetoric lived on and was taught throughout the years. There were four main ideas during these two eras that coincide with each other. The first two would be the education that went on during the renaissance era, and enlightenment era. These two subjects were ample for these eras. Along with, the differences between Whiteys view on rhetoric and George Campbell view on rhetoric.Their different view on what rhetoric is, their ideas, middling much made their ruin eras. Whitley believe that rhetoric was really an art. Whitely to a fault connects rhetoric with logic by defining argumentative composition as an offshoot of logic (World Press). Whitley also, believed that rhetoric could be used for evil purposes Just like Cicero did. This connects back to Augustine argument that rhetoric is to be sustained thin the church so it may not be able to be used with evil intentions. There is no amount of success that any student will have when studying rhetoric.In Wattles own words, acquire more doesnt teach you to think well but that thinking well will help you to learn more (World Press). Whitley viewed that in order to know the educational side of rhetoric it has to be comprised exercises that are relevant to students studies, current events, and personal lives. Whitely argues that the systems help to improve natural abilities but they cannot supersede natural ability. Once a student has learned the system, he can manipulate it, but this again does not mean that his ability has improved (World Press). I believe in what Whitley believes in. I can see how rhetoric could be used for evil, if it was virtuallything that was so powerful among society back in his time. I also believe in his teachings, or at least the way rhetoric should be taught. It is in my understanding since taking this course, that rhetoric is a difficult subject to understand. The way that Whitley views rhetoric, it is not s omething that can be taught through a book. For someone to understand rhetoric they have to be taught wrought real life. Through trial and error, with examples or situations on using it properly.Campbell, on the other hand, believed reasoning is a natural part of rhetoric. Rhetoric begins with the search for truth and then proceeds to persuasion, the attempt to move the will to respectable action. See, what Campbell saw rhetoric as, was the scientific side of it. He did not believe it could be used for evil like Whitley believed. According to our book, George Campbell was one of the most important rhetorical theorists of the 18th century (peg. 179). Campbell was open to new ideas, ND intended to develop a new rhetoric that incorporated insights of the prescience period (peg. 79). He thought that he was laying a foundation of classical rhetoric, and hoped to one day be able to move past those traditions and create something his own. Campbell advanced beyond traditional scientific r hetoric, but science meant something different for him. The one thing, that Campbell and Whitley disagreed on, was argumentation. Whitley did not care about the larger philosophical issues on rhetoric. Whitley was always focused on the issues of argument (peg 182). He was most known for his concussion of types of argument and debate (peg. 182).Whereas Campbell, was only concerned to understand how the mind works. He believed that if you understood a persons mind, you had escort over them. On this bases I truly agree with Campbell on the thoughts of argumentation. Reason being is I truly think that if someone knows someone mind, and knows how they thing, they ultimately know what makes a person tick. They will truly know the best way to win argumentation with another person, in the quickest way possible. Each person, during an argument, has some sort of weakness, a click that when shushed by someone else will ultimately give up.When knowing a way someone thinks, you can reach that place a lot quicker than others. The foresight era and Renaissance era, are two very different periods in history. The Renaissance era is put with the advances of genuine subjects. Such as literature, architecture, humanism, and world economy. Meanwhile Enlightenment era advanced, different scientific methods, industrialization, rationality, astronomy, and calculus (wise geek). While doing some research on both eras one name in particular kept coming up. His name, Marcus Tulips Cicero.It was through him that the thinkers of the Renaissance and Enlightenment discovered the riches of Classical rhetoric. In the Enlightenment era, public figures, such as George Campbell, used some of Cicerones works to help shape his own way of thinking. He helped guide the Scottish (though Celtic might be better since we need to include at least one Irishman in this list) Enlightenment and Common Sense movement of the 18th century. Cicerones influence hung over Home, Burke, and Smith (Briber). Cicero also influenced a man named Giovanni Vice. A rhetorician also, in his days.Vice found inspiration for this theory in Cicero and the rhetorical tradition rather than in the philosophers and logicians. Most of what the Enlightenment era took from Cicero, was his thinking of natural law. He helped develop their systems, due to his also theory on rhetoric. Cicerones main influence though, was during the Renaissance era. His Ciceronian influence was around and marked during the Renaissance, it was limited to a degree. Like the Enlightenment era, his influence during these times was derived from a very small number of his works. Most notably for both eras, De Invention (peg 43).Following the Hellenic sophists, Cicero represents language as the force that led humanity out of the wilderness into civilization, a political force through public speech that allowed peoples to make laws for themselves (peg. 149). This is at one time associated with the Enlightenment era, because the Enlighte nment era took language, and used it in argumentative rhetoric fashion. So, in essence the Enlightenment era used knowledge from the Renaissance era. Cicero, also had much influence on young philosophers/rhetoricians in the Renaissance era. Patriarch, used Cicero as a tool towards his own greatness.He studied Cicerones readings and added them to his literary education. Cicerones rhetoric was the rudimentary to Italys return to greatness (peg. 1 52). Villa sought to broaden the conception of proper Latin beyond the model established by Cicero (peg. 154). So in turn, he used Cicero as a starting block, which most rhetoricians did in these days, and try to go beyond what he had started. Lastly, Cicero had effect on the two written books, A Treatise of Schemes and Tropes, The Art or Craft of Rhetoric, and The Rate of Rhetoric (peg. 159). These were all key pieces of rhetorical text in this day and age.All of which used Cicerones views as a way to teach and provide information, in these books. I believe that rhetoric, was important as can be for these two periods. Not Just, Cicerones views on rhetoric, but everyones views that were important rhetoricians in this world, were used to shape those periods. I also, feel that at these times, the importance of education started to come about more. It would seem that at these times, people were better educated than in past years. In my personal opinion though, I think the Enlightenment era would be a personal ducky of mine.The season being the Enlightenment era was all about argumentation. The book explains on how, that in that time, they used rhetoric as a way to win arguments. In my mind that is pretty fascinating because I do believe arguments are necessary in life. I really enjoyed though, how both eras used Cicero. He is by far my favorite rhetorician, and I feel that it is why, the two eras were so successful and important in history. His views helped shaped two eras, and help them be successful, and in my mind the se eras were very successful, at leading the future to where we are today. Work Cited