What the World Need Now is Love and Rhetoric

A familiar figure has been appearing in the news these days just about as frequently as the names of our most notorious politicians. This figure is everywhere, and not always used wisely or well. As with anything that everyone seems to think they know, there's a great deal of abuse of it--in social media and on TV,

The figure is rhetoric. And not only is this figure being misused. There's been a great deal of bad reporting on the practice of it. 

Every morning, a reporter calls a politician's speech rhetoric, and she means to suggest language that is separated from facts or reality. In this view, in the news especially, rhetoric is seen as mostly empty talk. Most people who think this think there are two ways to use language--to lie or tell the truth; to create impressions or simply state facts. And in this bad/good binary, rhetoric is seen as bad, as quick bumper sticker jingles. We've seen them on placards or heard them chanted at the conventions: "Stronger together," "Make America Great Again," "Lock her up," or "Feel the Bern." 

For better or worse, this is the way we think about this figure. And in a political season, rhetoric is the politician's trade. 

No wonder we don't like politicians or their trade. 

Factions and Values

The peculiar political atmosphere we are collectively experiencing, I am convinced, is because rhetoric is not being taught. I really think this has to do with education. 

This year, the two major political parties in our country have been threatened with break ups, mostly connected to the questionable character of the parties' candidates, but also due to what are interesting, changing demographics. On all sides, committed and sometimes idealistic voters have splintered off into factions. In one convention last week, many seats were empty, and many important party stalwarts refused to show up. In the other this week, protests and chants have sometimes disrupted the proceedings. A big part of the problem seems to be the controversial character of the nominees, who inspire hate or love in a way that can only be fueled by a strong sense of certain values. 

Ethos is the traditional rhetorical term used to describe this form of persuasion tied to character. It is also seen as the problem. We could blame TV. We could blame social media. But our current political atmosphere seems poisoned by attacks on character--devil terms and ad hominem attacks (that is, instead of addressing an opponent's arguments, we attack the person). 

What is needed more than ever at this time, both to break us out of attack mode and out of thinking that people who disagree with us are evil, is a healthy dose of the kind of rhetoric the ancient Greeks and Romans would have understood. We need a rhetoric that is not just represented by slogans and catch phrases--though those are some of the forms that rhetoric takes. We need to understand that rhetoric is about values. Where we see evil--Hitler, The Joker, The Criminal who needs to be locked up--the ancients saw values. Where we see absolute certainty and "facts" and, in our opponents, the demise of the free world, the ancients saw opinions. Values and opinions are always in play, ways to find consensus and build understanding, even with opponents. Values and opinions, when shared, help to unite the village. 

This seems less accessible today. In our binary view of language, we believe that there is scientific language--what is unbiased and true and accurately representing reality. And then there is poetry--pretty metaphors that are decorative but frivolous. We usually think that our party holds the truth and is being scientific. Our opponents are engaging in poetry or, worse, rhetoric. 

Rhetoric as Art 

The art of rhetoric involves recognizing that no one is objective and scientific, and that everyone is doing rhetoric. The moment the scientist turns from her lab to explain her findings to the public, she is practicing rhetoric, not science, because she is engaging in values and opinions. As one great teacher of rhetoric, Richard Weaver, once put it in a wonderful title to a wonderful essay, "Language is Sermonic." That is, all language preaches values. It never does not do this. It is never merely scientific. 

The trouble is that most of us don't believe this. We believe that what we have is absolute certainty. We believe so strongly in our dogmas that we can't hear the other people in the room talking. This has sometimes been referred to as the "rhetoric of the closed fist." It's opposite, "the rhetoric of the open hand," seems vulnerable, but it is a wonderful difference from the slogans and posturing of people who are convinced that they are right, and everyone who disagrees with them is not just wrong, but evil--threatening the constitution, trying to help our enemies, or wanting to bring the barbarians in. 

This means that we can't persuade each other. This means there is no discussion. There is only chanting and ugly meme fights on Facebook. And we don't even know that our opinions are opinions. 

The Greek word for opinion, doxa, is found in a word like "paradox." As long as we are convinced that we are right, or that our opponents are just fools, clowns, or communists, that is all we will have. Equally opposed opinions.