OK, maybe this is a bit of a misnomer…there is great value in studying Rhetoric (the art of persuasion), Dialectic (reasoning by dialog to elicit truth), and argumentation (how to propound arguments and how to ‘make a case’). The fact is that these skills may be about as valuable as anything a student can learn in school…from the standpoint of being of living in the adult world, of having to make decisions about things, where you may need to decide what the truth is, an d to see if you are being manipulated.
This is such an all encompassing reason, that I can’t see much point in describing others… This is all about learning how to think…’to think on your feet’. This doesn’t mean that these skills are only for you to express points to others, the fact is that there may be far more value in studying these disciplines in that you are constantly being bombarded with persuasive arguments…on TV commercials, in magazines, from political points of view. You need some tools with which to push through the spin and obfuscation.
I have some links at the bottom of this post to get you on the start of this journey (there is plenty to find online!). But first, I need to spend some time explaining not what this is, but why you need it, and sadly enough, why you have likely never been taught how to think this way.
There are many cases where you may have been expected to have these sorts of tools in school, but only in some rare cases are middle and high school students given the opportunity to learn these arts…If you were in an extra-curricular forensic debate team you might have a head start, and in some rare cases you may have actually learned not just how to win a debate, but to see though another’s argument…
For the rest of secondary school students, you will sometimes be presented with tests or quizzes which might have as questions “compare and contrast ___.” What they didn’t tell you is that this is essentially an argument, where you are attempting to persuade the teacher to agree with your point of view on a subject…how do you do it?
Usually you are told to write a paragraph of similarities between these two presented topics, and then another paragraph of the differences…Some teachers also expect a conclusion, and since without any real training most students rely upon the only form of conclusion that they are aware of (i.e. the last act in prime time TV shows, or conclusions to blockbuster movies). Understandably the results tend toward the unpersuasive and often the trite.
Does this mean that students are innately sloppy thinkers? NO, it means that they haven’t been very effectively taught. All the reason for you to take the initiative to develop you own skills.
Learning How to Use the Three Main Rhetorical Styles
http://www.rpi.edu/dept/llc/webclass/web/project1/group4
How do I learn proper rhetoric?
http://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/a4iu1/how_do_i_learn_proper_rhetoric
What is Rhetoric?
http://edurhetor.wordpress.com/rhetoric
Dialectic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic
Dialectic
http://www.orientalia.org/wisdom/Philosophy/Dialectic.shtml
