The Rhetoric and the Renaissance 1400-

• Italy--Machiavelli and Ramus

• Basically nothing new

• Reactions to Greeks and Romans either pro or con

• Machiavelli--political and applied Aristotle

• Ramus--philosophical and anti-Aristotle

Machiavelli

• To convey religiosity=be generous: “my ranch as a park”

• To convey compassion=be sensitive: “I know how you feel”

• To demonstrate faith=be pure in speech and active: “family values”

• To demonstrate sincerity+remain strong: “public officials at funerals”

More Machiavelli

• To demonstrate prudence=ponder and reflect: “Let me think about that for moment”

• “Everyone sees who you appear to be, few sense who you really are.” (Smith, p. 205)

Ramus

• “Everything that Aristotle said is wrong”• Division of the Canon• Inventio and dispositio only• To this day a division in the academy because

of his influence.• A voiceless, objective, depersonalized,

naked, natural way of speaking, mathematical (Smith, p. 214)

In summary. . .

• Both religion and science the same mark on rhetoric: “There is little need for an art form that dealt with probabilities.”

• Yet, ironically science deals with probabilities

The Formula

• Rhetoric Dialectic

• Enthymemes Induction Evidence

• Conclusions Generalization

Science and Communication

• Today scientists are like witch doctors of tribal myths

• Genetic determinism (physis) over culture (nomos)

• Yet, always probablities

Science and Probabilities

• Dialectic=induction

• Rhetoric=example

• Probabilities

Science, Probabilities (the curve)and Communication

• How many sexes are their?

• What is intelligence?

• Others?

• What happens to the data 2 or 3 deviations from the mean?