Rhetorical Reflection on the Method of Argument in Debate

Sam-Yel Park

Role of persuasion in all human relations is necessary, and there is no human organization which does not depend on persuasion to alter the other’s mind and behavior. Likewise, persuasion plays a critical role in a situation of public speech where one’s argument and thought to be delivered. It cannot be a good speech without appealing and persuasive power no matter how rational and acceptable argument it is; debate is also limited to this sphere of communication. By focusing on persuasive aspect of debate, this paper reflects the method of rhetorical argument, one of the major factor that educe persuasion. It must be noted that in a rhetorical situation, the precise logical argument is less likely to possess a persuasive power; and there is a reason here that in rhetorics, method of rhetorical argument is used by the division of precise dialectical argument. Likewise the rhetorical situation, persuasion in debate is affected by complex factors. In debate, method of rhetorical argument could become one model since it is difficult to acquire the persuasive power solely with logical statement. This argument method is a unique that can have a public persuasive power; and is distinguished from the method of logical argument confined to the formative structure or characteristics of its argument. It is necessary to have a method of rhetorical argument which possess a persuasive power rather than a simple logical statement in debatable situation. A debater only skilled in method of logical argument, he or she is likely to face a contradictory situation where what his or her saying is right but not being able to persuade. This is why, in a debate, both rhetorical mind and argument method is necessary. This paper illuminates a rhetorical aspect in debate and suggests the method of rhetorical argument adequate to debate by focusing on Aristotle’s rhetoric inference.

Citation status

KCI Citation Counts (1)
열림/닫힘 버튼
REFERENCES (19)
열림/닫힘 버튼
* 2022년 이후 발행 논문의 참고문헌은 현재 구축 중입니다.

[book] Aristotle / 1991 / Aristotle on Rhetoric. in: with Introduction, Note, and Appendixes / Oxford

[book] Aristotle / 1991 / The Art of Rhetoric / London

[book] Aristotle / 1975 / The “Art” of Rhetoric / Cambridge

[book] Aristotle / 1966 / Topica / Cambridge

[book] 아리스토텔레스 / 1998 / 변증론 / 까치글방

[book] Bons, J. A. E. / 2002 / Reasonable Argument before Aristotle: The Root of The Enthymeme. in: Dialectic and Rhetoric / Boston

[book] Carey, C. / 1994 / Rhetorical means of persuasion. in: Persuasion-Greek Rhetoric in Action / New York

[book] Krabbe, E. C. W. / 2002 / Meeting in The House of Callias: An Historical Perspective on Rhetoric and Dialectic. in: Dialectic and Rhetoric / Boston

[book] Ryan, E. E. / 1984 / Aristotle’s Theory of Rhetorical Argumentation / Montreal

[book] 김 현 / 1985 / 수사학 / 문학과지성사

[book] 게르트 위딩 / 1996 / 고전 수사학 / 동문선

[book] 박승억 / 2005 / 토론과 논증 / 형설출판사

[book] 박성창 / 2000 / 수사학 / 문학과지성사

[book] 숙명여대 의사소통능력 개발센터 / 2008 / 발표와 토론 / 숙명여대

[book] 이상철 / 2009 / 스피치와 토론 / 성균관대학교 출판부

[book] 이정옥 / 2009 / 토론의 전략 / 문학과지성사

[book] 조종혁 / 1999 / 커뮤니케이션학 / 세영사

[book] 호세 안토니오 에르난데스 게레로 / 2001 / 수사학의 역사 / 문학과지성사

[journal] 한석환 / 2006 / Aristoteles und die Fragen der rhetorischen Argumentation / 서양고전학연구 / 한국서양고전학회 (25) : 217~248

KJC Korea
Journal Central

Statistics

Tools

Sharing

Issue List

Citation status