Today, the term “rhetoric” has unfortunately taken on a very negative connotation. People often accuse other people of using rhetoric to try to persuade others with blank words. In other words, many people think that rhetoric is not actually useful for healthy debate, but is instead trickery. For this reason, many people believe that as a society we should distance ourselves from rhetoric. This, however, could not be further from the truth.
One example of a dire need for rhetoric is the debate revolving around the actions of Kim Davis. For the past couple of weeks, media has blown up the story of local Kentucky County Clerk Kim Davis. Kim Davis repeatedly denied same-sex couples marriage licenses from her courthouse. Four couples successfully sued her on the basis of her direct violation of the supreme court’s legislation legalizing same-sex marriage across the fifty states, and Kim Davis was sentenced for five days of prison. As a result the intense media coverage on this issue, two very adamantly opposed sides have formed “debating” the issue of same-sex marriage. The word debate can hardly be used for the argument that has erupted.
On the day that Davis was released from her five day sentence, she was greeted by tons of her supporters and antagonists. Each side was avidly waving picket signs for their appropriate sides of the issue. However, the signs do not contain any rhetorical value. Supporters of same-sex marriage waved signs of commonplaces such as “Love Won”, while opponents waved signs like “Repent or Burn in Hell” or some even more derisive. Random people from both sides clashed face to face while screaming derisive comments. On Facebook memes have emerged from both sides with the intent to mock one another rather than to share ideas. The debate has become no more than an argument between elementary schoolers on the playground. Shouting commonplaces and mocking the people on the opposing side will not result in effective debate.
It is the goal of rhetoric to be a means to solve problems, not to escalate them. To create better rhetoric, we need to appeal to ethos, pathos, and logos. We need to listen to the opposing side’s arguments, and invent our own to refute. Instead, we are yelling offensive remarks and commonplaces, and completely blocking out the other side’s idea without consideration. If we continue to argue in this fashion, absolutely nothing can be accomplished.
