@article{ART001969581},
author={Sam-Yel Park},
title={Debate and Persuasion in Rhetoric},
journal={Philosophical Investigation},
issn={1598-7213},
year={2015},
volume={37},
pages={237-260},
doi={10.33156/philos.2015.37..010}
TY - JOUR
AU - Sam-Yel Park
TI - Debate and Persuasion in Rhetoric
JO - Philosophical Investigation
PY - 2015
VL - 37
IS - null
PB - Institute of philosophy in Chung-Ang Univ.
SP - 237
EP - 260
SN - 1598-7213
AB - This paper is to find the method to heighten persuasion in a debate through artistic proofs indicated in Aristotle’s 「Rhetoric」. The basic purpose of debate is persuasion. An debate is a process to persuade an audience through the activity of an argument that the Affirmative and the Negative make an assertion on a given topic each other. In this case, the Affirmative and the Negative must not delivery their insistence simply. They have to prove rationally that their insistence is appropriate. Persuasion is achieved when an audience understands it to prove.
Then what is the method of a valid persuasion? In「Rhetoric」, Aristotle divides categories of ground into ethos, pathos and logos. And he denominates these an artistic proofs. The basic purpose of rhetoric is also persuasion like a debate. When they persuade lots of the public through a speech, there is no persuading them only with a claims. artistic proofs Aristotle speaks can work as ethos to reveal character of an debaters and to make him get public trust in order to win a victory in an debate, pathos to make sympathy sentimentally between an debaters and an audience, and logos to emphasize an rational aspect of a claims.
In Constructive of a debate ,an refutation, or the closing remark, how to use ethos, pathos, and logos appropriately Aristotle speaks has a great effect on persuasion.
KW - debate;persuasion;rhetoric;ethos;pathos;logos
DO - 10.33156/philos.2015.37..010
ER -
Sam-Yel Park. (2015). Debate and Persuasion in Rhetoric. Philosophical Investigation, 37, 237-260.
Sam-Yel Park. 2015, "Debate and Persuasion in Rhetoric", Philosophical Investigation, vol.37, pp.237-260. Available from: doi:10.33156/philos.2015.37..010
Sam-Yel Park "Debate and Persuasion in Rhetoric" Philosophical Investigation 37 pp.237-260 (2015) : 237.
Sam-Yel Park. Debate and Persuasion in Rhetoric. 2015; 37 237-260. Available from: doi:10.33156/philos.2015.37..010
Sam-Yel Park. "Debate and Persuasion in Rhetoric" Philosophical Investigation 37(2015) : 237-260.doi: 10.33156/philos.2015.37..010
Sam-Yel Park. Debate and Persuasion in Rhetoric. Philosophical Investigation, 37, 237-260. doi: 10.33156/philos.2015.37..010
Sam-Yel Park. Debate and Persuasion in Rhetoric. Philosophical Investigation. 2015; 37 237-260. doi: 10.33156/philos.2015.37..010
Sam-Yel Park. Debate and Persuasion in Rhetoric. 2015; 37 237-260. Available from: doi:10.33156/philos.2015.37..010
Sam-Yel Park. "Debate and Persuasion in Rhetoric" Philosophical Investigation 37(2015) : 237-260.doi: 10.33156/philos.2015.37..010
