The Rhetorical Discourse Project
Throughout the rhetorical discourse project we have discussed many arguments of the world, held on all scales, and we have learned to use and detect rhetoric as it is thrown at us everyday. My peers and I were the first generation born into the digital era, the era of internet and connection, but with this connection have also come radicalization, hate, and lies. It is therefore extremely important that we learn the nature of rhetoric, both good and bad, so that we may talk to our neighbors and friends, and recognize truth from fallacy in our lives.
Rhetoric Essay: Abortion
Reflection:
The project was, as I said above, a comprehensive view of rhetoric as it has been used and continues to be used in our everyday lives. My project was an Op-Ed titled “The Unwinnable Argument” regarding the contention that surrounds abortion, made evermore dire by the recent supreme court cases that have threatened to overturn Roe v. Wade. I made a small visual as well, but before looking at that, as it is very firmly within my beliefs and may turn certain audiences against me, I ask that you read the Op-Ed linked above. It may or may not influence or inform you more on the subject but I hope it at least gives you a more comprehensive view on the subject, as writing it did for me.
Throughout this project, I have discovered how my ideologies as a young American were influenced and continue to be influenced by my demographic. I was born into a middle-class, white family, as a female. Especially the female part of my identity has thoroughly shaped my views on the subject of abortion. I find myself sympathizing with the situations of the women whose stories of abortion came from before Roe v. Wade, the fear, the lack of reproductive rights, the helplessness, and I think the only way to avoid those feelings ever resurfacing in the people around me is to continue to allow abortions legally. This does not mean that I am averse to time limits on abortion, or regulatory measures, but I believe that in the end blanket laws are unable to prepare for the individual situations that occur in situations like this.
While this is the ideology that I hold, this project has forced me to look more closely at that ideology and change it as well. The other side of this argument believes in the right to life, in the same way that I do. They believe that life is special, and a gift that should not be taken away. I found many of their arguments hard to disagree with because we hold numerous beliefs in common, many of these similarities things I hadn’t even recognized before.
Rhetoric, ideology, and the “democratic experiment” are around us every day, rhetoric influencing ideology, ideology influencing democracy, and democracy and ideology influencing rhetoric, a cycle. The democratic experiment is the experiment of whether or not we can trust the majority of people around us to make the right decision, whether or not we agree with the said decision being beside the point. Ideology and rhetoric are strongly at the core of this I have learned. If a majority of people prefer something democracy will make it so, to the best of its ability, but those sides only shift and change as rhetoric influences them. The use of Rogerian rhetoric is important in this process. People's “willingness to be disturbed,” willingness to hear the other side of an argument is what allows democracy to work, without this the system would fail. We are dependent upon our ability to change our minds, to listen to logic and reason over pleasant lies because if we are unwilling to change or learn, democracy is already dead.
Throughout this project, I have discovered how my ideologies as a young American were influenced and continue to be influenced by my demographic. I was born into a middle-class, white family, as a female. Especially the female part of my identity has thoroughly shaped my views on the subject of abortion. I find myself sympathizing with the situations of the women whose stories of abortion came from before Roe v. Wade, the fear, the lack of reproductive rights, the helplessness, and I think the only way to avoid those feelings ever resurfacing in the people around me is to continue to allow abortions legally. This does not mean that I am averse to time limits on abortion, or regulatory measures, but I believe that in the end blanket laws are unable to prepare for the individual situations that occur in situations like this.
While this is the ideology that I hold, this project has forced me to look more closely at that ideology and change it as well. The other side of this argument believes in the right to life, in the same way that I do. They believe that life is special, and a gift that should not be taken away. I found many of their arguments hard to disagree with because we hold numerous beliefs in common, many of these similarities things I hadn’t even recognized before.
Rhetoric, ideology, and the “democratic experiment” are around us every day, rhetoric influencing ideology, ideology influencing democracy, and democracy and ideology influencing rhetoric, a cycle. The democratic experiment is the experiment of whether or not we can trust the majority of people around us to make the right decision, whether or not we agree with the said decision being beside the point. Ideology and rhetoric are strongly at the core of this I have learned. If a majority of people prefer something democracy will make it so, to the best of its ability, but those sides only shift and change as rhetoric influences them. The use of Rogerian rhetoric is important in this process. People's “willingness to be disturbed,” willingness to hear the other side of an argument is what allows democracy to work, without this the system would fail. We are dependent upon our ability to change our minds, to listen to logic and reason over pleasant lies because if we are unwilling to change or learn, democracy is already dead.