"For since sounds are voluntary and indifferent signs of any ideas,
a man may use what words he pleases to signify his own ideas to himself: and
there will be no imperfection in them, if he constantly use the same sign for
the same idea: for then he cannot fail of having his meaning understood,
wherein consist the right use and perfection of language" (Locke 817).
Compared to everything else we have read and studied this semester,
Locke seemed to present the clearest and most-straightforward argument about
rhetoric. The above quote, I feel, really captures the essence of what he tries
to establish. You must define yourself, and by doing that you will define your
parameters and clarify any pressing issues and questions that individuals may
have with your arguments. As stated in the text, “words having naturally no
signification, the idea which each stands for must be learned and retained, by
those who would exchange thoughts, and hold intelligible discourse with others,
in any language” (Locke 818).
We must utilize rhetoric in order to find the words that represent our
arguments clearest. We must be certain to define ourselves, and support those
definitions. For example, if I were to use the word “hyper reality,” it would
hold no significance until I explained that it a literary technique utilized to
create a believeable world in fantastical literature. Yet even that statement
holds no merit unless someone from academia is there to support what I can
claim this phrase to mean, and that statement does not get merit unless other
members of academia deem it so…It is a continuous cycle just to be able to have
one words definition.
This is the crucial part of what Locke is saying: define yourself to the
best of your ability so that your train of thought cannot be questioned.
I completely agree that this is the text that depicts rhetoric not necessarily the best so far in this course, but the most understandable for me. Although the language can at times be easy to stumble over, it lays rhetoric out in a way that isn't so ambiguous. Even though understanding all of the complexities that rhetoric entails has been difficult for me in this class, the idea of finding identity within yourself and your writing in order to make better argument is something I can absolutely identify with and in this class I search far and wide for things I can connect with in such a way. I find it so interesting of what we are learning in these texts from so so long ago hold true today as fundamentals of writings. This concept of identity in writing and defining your words can fit into so many of the conversations we have about writing now and are relevant to many of our cannons.
ReplyDelete