I really don't agree that in order to be an orator, an individual has to morally good. An orator is considered an exceptional speaker. In this case, history has heard many great speeches that have come from many individuals that were not morally good. One that I can think of is Adolf Hitler. One of the reasons so many people followed and believed in what he was saying was because of his speeches. His intentions were morally wrong and genocide occurred. So I cannot agree with the Greeks.
The one connection that I make with the connection of goodness, truth, and public communications comes from Aristotle. Ethos which refers to personal character. An individuals personal character can be destroyed because of evil and lies. In order for an individual to continually maintain personal character they need to demonstrate goodness and truth.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi,
ReplyDeleteI too did not agree that in order to be a good orator a person must be morally good. I used examples of a car salesman trying to convince you that you need a car that does things way beyond your needs with a price way beyond your means. Who really needs to watch DVD's in their car, unless you have a small child of course and need some sort of a distraction.
Hitler is a good example of an orator that lacks goodness. I also agree with your second paragraph about Aristotle’s connection with ethos and personal character. An evil person can come off as possessing goodness and truth which was the case with Hitler.
My husband and I are also Sharks fans. It all started after his boss gave us his tickets to a game and we are hooked. We were at last Saturday's game and it sucked. They were playing so badly. First game I have ever been to where they lost.
Capone's Mom
Hello sjsueducatedfool! Does a speakers moral character or intentions negate the message? Can it negate the message? In the case of Hitler, what tactics or strategies did he employ to be considered a good speaker?
ReplyDelete