Anamnesis (an’-am-nee’-sis): Calling to memory past matters. More specifically, citing a past author [apparently] from memory. Anamnesis helps to establish ethos [credibility], since it conveys the idea that the speaker is knowledgeable of the received wisdom from the past.
George Sand tells us, “There is only one happiness in this life, to love and be loved.” Sand almost had it right! But she missed one important point. As Johnny Depp so thoughtfully put it: “Tomorrow it’ll all be over, then I’ll have to go back to selling pens again.”
Between Sand and Depp there is an emotional chasm. Between Depp and Sand there is a ticking time bomb.
Tomorrow is always inevitably coming and it can blow to bits the promises, the affections, the passions, and yes, even the “one happiness” afforded by “loving and being loved.”
And when that “one happiness” is exploded by time, burned to ashes by circumstance, and blown away by fortune’s wind, what is left?
Going back to selling pens, or writhing in pain on the cold dirt of despair?
- Post your own anamnesis on the “Comments” page!
Definition courtesy of “Silva Rhetoricae” (rhetoric.byu.edu). Gorgias has inserted the bracketed words [apparently] and [credibility].
Posted in anamnesis
Tagged anamnesis, current-events, elocutio, ethos, example, figures of speech, George Sand, Johnny Depp, love, rhetoric, the future, the past, trope
Martyria (mar-tir’-i-a): Confirming something by referring to one’s own experience.
She keeps referring to her 35 years of experience as a reason to vote for her. Well, I have experience too, and what’s more, I learned something from it–how to bring people together, inspire confidence, and make lasting positive change.
Definition courtesy of “Silva Rhetoricae” (rhetoric.byu.edu).
Dirimens Copulatio (di’-ri-mens ko-pu-la’-ti-o): A figure by which one balances one statement with a contrary, qualifying statement (sometimes conveyed by “not only … but also” clauses). A sort of arguing both sides of an issue.
Protagoras (c. 485-410 BC) asserted that “to every logos (speech or argument) another logos is opposed,” a theme continued in the Dissoi Logoi of his time, later codified as the notion of arguments in utrumque partes (on both sides). Aristotle asserted that thinking in opposites is necessary both to arrive at the true state of a matter (opposition as an epistemological heuristic) and to anticipate counterarguments. This latter, practical purpose for investigating opposing arguments has been central to rhetoric ever since sophists like Antiphon (c. 480-410 BC) provided model speeches (his Tetralogies) showing how one might argue for either the prosecution or for the defense on any given issue. As such, [this] names not so much a figure of speech as a general approach to rhetoric, or an overall argumentative strategy. However, it could be manifest within a speech on a local level as well, especially for the purposes of exhibiting fairness (establishing ethos [audience perception of speaker credibility]).
This pragmatic embrace of opposing arguments permeates rhetorical invention, arrangement, and rhetorical pedagogy.
Not only should one tell the truth, but also, one should be prepared to lie when lying is warranted. Let me explain how this pertains to . . .
Definition and commentary courtesy of “Silva Rhetoricae” (rhetoric.byu.edu).
Posted in dirimens copulatio
Tagged Antiphon, Aristotle, dirimens copulatio, Dissoi Logoi, elocutio, ethos, figures of speech, Gorgias's Weblog, in utrumque partes, logos, Protagoras, rhetoric, rhetorical invention, Tetralogies, The Daily Trope