• What is Graduate Education?
• Communication Defined
•  Early History of the Field of Communication
• Suggested Readings:
  •  Boxing Plato’s Shadow
  • Gorgias’ Encomium of Helen

Graduate Education Defined

Graduate education is basically any kind of degree after having attained your bachelor. The most common type of graduate studies is what you are doing now: the master’s degree. The next step in graduate education is the doctoral degree, which trains and prepares students to follow a career at the Academia.

Some universities offer the so-called “professional studies”. This type of programs allow candidates to pursue a post-baccalaureate degree in professional fields that demand a particular degree to be able to practice the profession, such as medicine or law.

Many universities also offer post-baccalaureate certificate programs. Those programs train students in very well defined professional fields and provide them with specific skills. Still, students do not attain any academic degree.

In this link, you can find the graduate programs offer at CCSU.

This link takes you to the page in our Web-site that describes our graduate programs (MS and Certificate)

There are two basic categories of master’s degrees: MS and MA.

TMS stands for Master of Science, while MA stands for Master of Arts.

MS normally have a more professional orientation. Such programs provide students with the knowledge and skills required in particular professional fields. MA programs normally have a more theoretical content. They also provide students with research skill that would allow them to go in depth into the study of different phenomena.

The master’s degree in Strategic Communication at Central Connecticut State University is a MS, i.e. it is has clear professional orientation. Our program offers a variety of face-to-face, online and hybrid courses (half online, half onground). We aim at preparing our students for professional careers in Mass Media and at communication departments in public and private, profit and nonprofit organizations.

The characteristics and expectations in graduate education are completely different from undergraduate programs:

1 – The most important difference is the level of independence and responsibility. Graduate students are supposed to organize and structure their time to reach their objectives without a strong supervision.

2 – The contents of the master programs are much more focused and in-depth. All the courses in the program contribute to the training of candidates for well-defined goals.

3 – The nature of the assignments also differs from undergraduate education. Candidates for a master’s degree have fewer assignments, but need to work autonomously in creative projects that involve serious and exhaustive research.

4 – In many cases, which is highly recommended, students finish their graduate studies with a master thesis or a capstone project. In this final work, they have to demonstrate their capacity for working independently acquired through course projects. Our program also offers the master’s degree candidates the option of finishing their program with a comprehensive exam.

5 – Finally, students normally work closely with a faculty member who acts as their mentor. Thus the relationship with the professors is also completely different in graduate education.

Communication Defined

(I created a series of video lectures on this subject. Since some of my students found it “annoying” in former courses, I have decided to add the script to this learning unit and further communication models as well, Here is the link to the audiovisual lectures in case you want to compare: 

Communication Defined

Communication Contexts

Communication Models

What is Communication?

In this first online lecture we will try to answer this question.

First of all, we must analyze the word and its etymological origin:

COMMUNICATION

The word comes from Latin adjective “COMMUNIS” (common in English).

What do we need to have in “common” when we are communicating?

• We have a material or energetic connection (In our case, the vocal and hearing organs and the air through which we communicate (vocal chords generate waves in the air)
• We have also common signs, a language, which allows us to create meaning.
• We have a common knowledge, common experiences that gave a meaning to the repertoire of signs.

Communication Defined

I have gathered some definitions of Human Communication. Let’s analyze them:

• Communication is the simultaneous sharing and creating of meaning through human symbolic interaction (Seiler and Beall)
• Communication is the process of human beings responding to the symbolic behavior of other persons (Adler and Rodman)
• Communication is the process of creating meaning between two or more people (Tubbs and Moss)

we need to discuss some of the key terms in those definitions:

MEANING – One of the most important concept in this course. Meanings refers to the shared experience, whichis is always generic. The individuals who have in common the English Language shared the meaning of the word “chair”

SYMBOLS –Communication is always a symbolic interaction.

MESSAGE – It refers to the content of the symbols, i.e. the action that the symbols are replacing.

PROCESS – Communication is a process. No something static, but something dynamic. The information we exchange in this process can change us.

Communication Contexts

Communication contexts are the different areas in which communication can occur and be studied.

We will learn several subjects, maybe too many subjects, but we will just gain a superficial vision of this research fields.

It is important to know the main statements of certain theories about Communication and certain important names. But I can’t expect from you a deep knowledge in any of them.

Important in this course is not the depth, but rather the breadth.

These different communication contexts are defined by the number of people who participate in the communication:

Interpersonal Communication

Basically, we talk about INTRA-personal communication when we communicate with ourselves – What we call thinking is a form of intrapersonal communication.

But also when we are thinking, i.e. communicating with ourselves, we have an interaction with others.

George Herbert Mead created to this regard the term

SYMBOLIC INTERACTION.

According to Mead, we are constantly thinking about what others may think or say about ourselves – And these thoughts determine our behavior.

As a matter of fact, the feedback we received from our social environment is the most important factor for our self-esteem.

Interpersonal Communication (Dyadic Communication)

Between two people – this is the basic form of communication.

This kind of Communication may be defined by the degree of closeness or intimacy between the participants.

It is usually more informal than forms of communication, more spontaneous, and there are no fixed roles.

Small Group Communication

This form of Communication is normally defined as

“the process by which three or more members of a group exchange verbal or non-verbal messages in an attempt to influence one another”.

Small-group interaction occurs in social situations.

Work-groups are a good example of this form of communication – by the way. We are going to work in groups this term.

The group has to be small enough – so that every member knows the other ones – and can participate in the interaction.

Certain roles are defined in the group communication dynamic. We will learn later in this course which are those roles.

The communication has also high degree on spontaneity – but is more formal that the interpersonal communication.

Mass Communication

The most important feature of this form of communication is that it is mediated. Mass Communication depends on a sophisticated technological infrastructure, which is necessary to reach masses of people.

This creates an unbalance between sender and receiver because the sender totally control the flow of messages.

The feedback in mass communication is non-existent – or only very limited.

Principles of Communication

Communication is a process of adjustment.

This basically means that, to communicate, we need to use the same system of signals. If we don’t have this in common, we will NEVER be able to communicate.

And a very important part of the process of communication will be to adapt ourselves to the system of signals of other people.

This especially evident in intercultural communication.

Communication is a package of messages.

And that means, according to the author, that communication always occurs in “packages” of verbal and non-verbal behaviors or messages.

Sometimes, both verbal and nonverbal messages reinforce each other, but sometimes they may be contradictory.

Communication involves Content and Relationship dimensions.

This basically means that communication can exist on two levels.
The speakers can communicate about something external (the weather, the situation in Iraq, a new car model, etc …)
Or the can communicate about themselves and their relationship.

Communication can be intentional or unintentional.

Communication is frequently intentional – we frequently have a purpose. And this purpose may be:
To learn or to teach something
To create or reinforce relationships, to interact with other individuals
To play or to enjoy or entertain yourselves
To influence or to persuade someone else.

But communication may also be unintentional.

Communication is inevitable, irreversible and unrepeatable

Inevitable – we cannot help it, we have to communicate.

Irreversible – you cannot un-communicate. When you have delivered a message, this message will have consequences. You can tray to reduce the effects of your message, but that means that you will have to produce new messages that will have new effects.

Unrepeatable – You cannot repeat a message, because communication will always depend on the situation and circumstances, and every form of communication will alter the circumstances, that is, the situation will be different and that will condition new messages.
.

Misconception about Communication

Some myths about communication you may read and hear repeatedly:

Communication is a cure-all. Communication con help us resolve problems and find solutions, this is clear, AND, as I said, the way to civilization is the substitution of action by communication.

BUT communication can also create problems. And we cannot forget or ignore that communication does NOT solve the problem, the messages we create may solve problem, but if the message is not adequate, then it will make it worse.

Quantity means quality. Sometimes we can think that the more we communicate, the better.
We believe that people who can communicate easily are more friendly, competent and powerful, and have more leadership potential.

However, quantity of communication is not the same as quality.

As we said in the case of the first misconception – first myth – the quality of the message is what will determine the effectiveness.

Meaning is in the words we use. Meaning is NOT in the words means that we gave the words a meaning, and thus, the meaning of the words will always depend on the cultural background.

The meaning of words in the course of time. We construct the world with the words we use to describe it.

And our perception of the world will also be determined by the words other use to describe this world.

We have a natural ability to communicate. Like any other ability or skill, communication can be learned and should be trained.

And like in any other physical ability, even if you are a natural, you will have to work to improve the born ability.

Communication is reversible. As we saw in the last of the principles of communication. When you have delivered a message – regardless of the medium – this messages will have consequences.

Communication Models

In this second lecture, we will talk today about different models of the process of communication.

Models are theories that try to explain the

paradigm of communication

What is this?

The paradigm of communication?

This is simply
what happens when a form of communication – any form of communication – takes place.

A MODEL is always a description.

On the one hand, it has to be as simple and as abstract as possible.

On the other hand, it needs to be true to the reality that is being described

Laswell’s Formula

The first Model we will learn is the so-called Laswell’s formula.

Harold D. Lasswell is a very important name in Communication Sciences,

one of the Pioneers.

In 1948, he wrote a strongly influential book

“The structure and Function of Communication in Society”.

In this book, he introduced his formula as a convenient way to describe any act of communication.

He thought that the best way to describe an act of communication was to answer the following questions:

Who? (communicator)

Says what? (message)

In which channel? (medium)

To whom? receiver – (recipient)

With what effect? (effects)

The answer to those questions was the key, in Laswell’s opinion, to explain any communicative interaction. In this way, Lawswell alsodefined the most important research fields in communication.

Claude E. SHANNON and Warren WEAVER’s Mathematical Theory of Information

Another classic model in the field of communication.

Shannon and Weaver created with their model the foundation for the computing system that has revolutionized the world of communication.

Here is the model:

This model was thought for the technically assisted communication, for the mediated communication.

Therefore, Shannon and Weaver distinguish between information source and transmitter.
And between Destination and Receiver.

The message has to be converted – and the result, the converted information, they call SIGNAL.

So, the signal is the consequence of the Coding Process.

To understand the signal, that is the coded message, there has to be a decoding process.

CODING and DECODING are very important factors in every process of communication – constitutive features of the communication process also in the non-technical communication.

In the interpersonal (face to face) communication,

the communicator is at the same time Source and Coder.

You use the language and produce sounds.

The receiver – who is at the same time Decoder and Destination,

has to decode the acoustic signal (waves through the air) and interpret it.

A very important point in this model is the concept of NOISE.

It can be noise in the literal sense of the word (interferences on the phone), but noise

might be understood in metaphorical sense, as well, as any obstacle in the process of communication.

For example, if you have your cell phone on while reading this online lecture and check it regularly. This distraction may affect the effectiveness of a communicative act (reading my lecture).

Klaus Krippendorff’s Model

Kripendorff is a Geman scholar teaching currently at the University of Pennsylvania.

And here is his model:

As you see, there are two different kinds of interferences – or disturbances in the process of communication.

On the one hand the noise, a term that we already discussed in Shannon and Weaver’s model.

On the other hand the Equivocation, which

this is simply the loss of information in an act of communication.

The transmitted information – also called transinformation – is the relevant information that the receiver actually gets.

Finnally, Krippendorff introduces the concept of “entropy”. This word normally refers to the degree of disorder or uncertainty in any given system. In Krippendorff’s model, “entropy” refers to the individual and unique experiences that shape our personality and that influence the meaning we give to the messages that we create, but also to those messages that we receive.

Tubbs and Moss’s Communication Model

Stewart L. Tubbs and Sylvia Moss’s Model will be the last one we will analyze in our lecture:

The latest of the models also introduces new elements that help us better understand the process of communication.

Firs of all, this is the only two-way model analyzed in this learning unit. There are no fixed roles. Everyone is at the same time sender and receiver of messages. Both are sources of communication. And therefore, the author called them communicator 1 and 2.

Both of them have an INPUT,
INPUT is a word that Tubbs and Moss borrow from the computer terminology.

In this context, INPUT means all what the communicator knows and experiences,

all the stimuli, both past and present, that give us information about the world.

The INPUT is the information and experience we have at our disposal when we create messages. To this regard, INPUT is comparable to the concept of entropy in Krippendorff’s model.

Tubbs and Moss distinguish basically 4 kinds of messages:

1. verbal and intentional messages
2. nonverbal and intentional messages
3. non-verbal and non-intentional messages
4. verbal and non-intentional messages (slips of the tongue, things that you say unintentionally)

What they call “interference”, is what other authors call “noise”. In communication theory, interference and noise are synonymous. And that means any EXTERNAL factor that distorts the information transmitted to the receiver or distracts him or her from receiving it.

But beside these external factors, there are also internal factors that might affect the flow of communication.

And these internal factors are what the authors call FILTERS.

There are basically just two kind of filters:
The perceptual (or physiological) and
the psychological filters
But about filters, we will talk in the second learning module, when we discuss the topic of perception.

Another element this model includes is the feedback –

And in communication feedback is defined as

any kind of response you message might provoke in the audience.

The last factor is TIME.

The authors wanted to represent the factor time with the spiral background–

And this spiral symbolizes that the participants in a process of communication will never return to the point at which they started.

As we learned in the first online lecture, communication is irreversible, the delivery of messages will always have some consequences, and we cannot un-communicate what we have previously expressed.

This transactional model suggests that communication is not something static,

and that TIME is probably the factor that most influences the process of communication.

Early History of the Field of Communication

Communication is one of the oldest fields of scientific and philosophical inquiry.

The study of the nature of the communicative interaction and the possible effects of our communicative efforts appears early in the history of human thinking. The name those pioneers used to refer to the study of communication phenomena was “Rhetoric”. This discipline emerges as the same time – if not earlier – as Philosophy.

To understand why communication became relevant at that time and in that particular place, it is necessary to briefly discuss the historical background, what was going on in Greece – or more concretely Athens – in the 5th Century B.C.

Historical Background

The Greece world was undergoing deep transformations that will create the foundations for the Western Culture. We will focus here on two radical innovations in the social and political organization of those people.

The Birth of the POLIS

First of all, we need to point at a change in the basic organization of human groups. Until this time, cells of human coexistence had been organized around the family, the clan, or the tribe. The legislation of Solon and Cleisthenes (in the 6th Century B.C.) changed the organizational criterion of human society. The basic cell of organization was not longer the blood relationship, but the territory.

That was the birth of the POLIS, as the new organizational category of human coexistence.

The POLIS, the Greek City-State, created a new space, the public space, that did not exist in cultures that were based on the concept of family. In families, clans or tribes every aspect of human life belongs to the private sphere. In the new public space the ability to communicate became essential.

The Appearance of Democracy

The second radical innovation was a consequence of that change in the social organization of the people: the apparition of DEMOCRACY as a new form of political system.

The Greek democracy was not what we today know as democracy. It was a direct democracy, and not a representative one. Not every one was able to participate in the political administration of the POLIS. Only Athenian citizens were allowed to directly decide in the decisions that affected the polis. Women were excluded from the active political life, as well as slaves or foreigners. Only the male citizens born in Athens could take part in the political discussion.

Still, public debate was essential for the active participation. And for that, every Athenian citizen needed to improve his communication skills. This way, Rhetoric became the most important part in the higher education of the Athenians.

The Sophists

In this particular social and political climate, the sophists appeared in the 6th and above all the 5th Century BC.

The sophists were professional teachers who taught the Athenian middle and upper class how to express themselves in Public. It is very important to stress that practically all male Athenians actively participated in politics. And in addition to that, there were no lawyers. Everyone had to defend himself and his own business in the Greek Agora, the public market that also fulfilled the function of a courtroom.

Paradoxically, most of the sophists were foreigners who came to Athens attracted by the cultural splendor of the Greek Civilization. They earned their money as professional teachers of Rhetoric, the Art of Verbal Persuasion, but they also wrote speeches for people who were active in Athens’ politics and helped them reach the excellence in the management of affairs in their public life. We would call them today “Communication Professionals” or “Image Advisers”.

Even though they enjoyed a great popularity in Athens, they were also highly controversial.

They were controversial, above all, because of their moral relativism. They questioned the idea of a definitive moral truth. You can always find good arguments to defend each side of any issue. Nearly all the sophists had been learning and teaching in the most important cities along the Mediterranean Coast. They had seen that the moral values were different in the different places, and therefore they came to the conclusion that Moral is something relative that depends on the coordinates of time and space.

Athenians also mistrust the sophists’ radical skepticism. They taught that the world we perceive is just a linguistic construction. We create the world with the words we use to describe it. And therefore one can manipulate the human perception of the external world with a skillful use of the language.

The third reason why they were also hated by the Intellectual in Athens was that they got a lot of money for their teaching. They asked for astronomic fees. Some of them were paid 1,000 Drachma (the Greek currency) for a course. At that time, the salary of a worker was around one Drachma a day.

The philosophers in Athens thought them to be dangerous, harmful, truly poisonous Charlatans.

We will only mention here two names, the most relevant of the sophists:

Gorgias of Leontini (483-375 B.C.)

Gorgias thought that he could control the way his fellow citizens perceive the reality and thus, make them slaves. In the Encomium to Helen, he attributed to the speech a kind of magic power and compared its effects on the soul to the “power of drugs over the nature of bodies”.

He also recognized that emotions were much more powerful than reason to gain the will of the people.

In the history of philosophy, Gorgias is considered the father of the philosophical or radical skepticism . The 3-steps formulation of his skeptical philosophy made him both famous and infamous among the contemporaneous thinkers and philosophers.

The three steps are:

1. Nothing exists.
2. If anything did exist, we could not know it.
3. If we could know that something exists we sould never be able to communicate it.

The three sentences may sound arcane. We need to interpret them in relationship with Gorgias’s philosophy of language. His skepticism basically bases on the intrinsic limitation of language as an instrument of knowledge. Human language is the only instrument we have to achieve and express knowledge. Whatever we cannot express through language, we simply do not know.

The weakness of language is an obstacle to first perceive, then understand, and finally express real phenomena. This is the meaning of the three steps in Gorgias skeptical philosophy.

Protagoras of Abdera (485-411 B.C.)

If Gorgias is considered the father of the philosophical skepticism, Protagoras was the creator of the Moral Relativism.

He also coined a famous phrase that explains his relativistic philosophy: the famous “homo-mensura” (man-measure) sentence:

“Of all things the measure is man, of things that are not, that they are not, of thing that are, that they are.”

The statement, again, needs to be deciphered. All our evaluations are based in a series of pre-existing cognitive structures. We called something big or small, good or evil, beautiful or ugly according to our own experiences. Those cognitive structures precede perception. Thus, since we organize new information using pre-existing those mental boxes, we can hardly separate cognition and judgment. The very moment we are aware of anything, we pass, consciously or unconsciously, a judgment on it.

He created a teaching method for his relativistic approach to ethics, the so-called ANTILOGIKE. His Students had to look for contradictory arguments (Dissoi Logoi), arguments to defend both sides of any given Issue. They had to develop a moral flexibility that allowed them to defend every point of view. Only on the basis of this flexibility, they could later develop the rhetorical skills to make the weaker position look stronger.

Plato (427-377 B.C.)

Plato is, probably, the greatest philosopher of all times. The German philosopher Friedrich Schleiermacher said that the whole history of philosophy is just a collection of marginal notes to Plato’s dialogues.

He is also entertaining to read – because he wrote in the form of dialogues, very lively discussions, in which the author presented his master Socrates talking and arguing with important names of his time in politics and philosophy.

Plato rejected the two most important ideas of the sophist: their moral relativism and their skepticism.

Against what Protagoras thought and taught, Plato believed in a definitive and transcendent moral truth. Moreover, this truth might be accessible to humans.

As rational beings, we are part of the “noumenal world”, the world of ideas (or pure forms). We know these ideas even before we are born. Yet, it becomes difficult to recognize those ideas in our animal (physical) existence, because the appetites of the flesh, of our body distract us from the essential truths. The mission of the philosopher is according to Plato to help us recognize and remember – not learn – the hidden transcendent truth to which we had access before we were born.

Regarding Rhetoric, the systematic study of the effects of communication, Plato’s thinking is especially relevant because he was able to anticipate all the ethical issues associated to persuasive communication nowadays. He saw clearly the potential of language to influence people and to achieve power and realized that this power can be misused.

Plato’s most important works about Rhetoric have the title of two important sophists: PROTAGORAS and GORGIAS. In both books, he presented his master Socrates talking to both thinkers and some of their followers. Both dialogues were used to attack the sophists and the main discipline they were teaching: RHETORIC (although he also showed respect for the intellectual size of both thinkers).

He thought Rhetoric to be an evil thing, evil and ugly, something that could corrupt people and society. There are basically two reasons to understand Plato’s mistrust against the sophists and his hatred for their teaching activity.

Relationship of Rhetoric to Power

Rhetoric seemed Plato just a means to achieve Power, social and political power.

The sophists were not interested in studying and teaching the means to achieve true knowledge or true ARETE (virtue). In Greece, at Plato’s time, the main virtue was to serve honestly the Polis, to offer the own knowledge and the own skills to the service of the community.

In his opinion, the Sophists did exactly the opposite. They made use of the polis to achieve personal power and influence. And communication was their tool.

Therefore, as an instrument to serve just the own interests – and not the interests of the POLIS – Rhetoric was something evil, a form of corruption.

Relationship of Rhetoric to truth

According to Plato, Rhetoric was neither EPISTEMÉ (true knowledge), nor TECHNÉ (practical application of knowledge).

Follow this link to learn more about the nuances of these two terms in Greek philosophy.

EPISTEMÉ and TECHNÉ should be the only goal of philosophical endeavors because they contribute to improve human life or human society. rhetoric doesn’t contribute to either of theses goals. For that reason, it deserves Plato’s contempt.

The only concern of the sophists, according to Plato, was political power. In democracy, in any kind of democracy, to gain power means to gain the favor and the will of the people.

The sophist tried to achieve the kind of power that flows from the people through MANIPULATION of DOXA (Opinion – or also Public Opinion), basing their discourse on emotional appeals.

Especially, the confusion of DOXA (opinion) or PISTIS (belief) and EPISTEMÉ irritated Plato. In his opinion, the sophists presented mere OPINIONS or BELIEFS as definitive TRUTHS. In his speeches, when they defended a certain position, they defended it as a definitive truth.

In conclusion, we can say that Rhetoric is for Plato a form of Prostitution of knowledge.

The Objective is to achieve Power – using emotions to manipulate Opinion (individual and public opinion).

It is a prostitution of knowledge, because it uses knowledge not for trying to approach the truth, not to understand and explain things, or to reach virtue, but to flatter the public.

This kind of power was for Plato just an illusion. When you use rhetoric to flatter public opinion, you don’t have real power over it. You are rather subordinating yourself, your discourse and your ideas, to what public opinion demands.

This way, Plato reverted Gorgias’s sentence. This author thought, as we just saw, that he was able to make men slave with the use of language. By the contrary, Plato was aware that if you want the power that flows from public opinion, you would necessarily end up making yourself a slave of public opinion.

Aristotle (384-322 B.C.)

Aristotle was not born in Athens, although his parents were born Greeks. He was born in the Macedonian town of STAGIRA.

He lived the most part of his life in Athens, but also kept a good relationship to Macedonia. He was the adviser of the king Phillip, and the tutor of his son, the great Alexander, the man who founded the first world empire. This connection aroused sometimes distrust among the Athenians. Above all in times of war, Aristotle had to leave Athens several times.

Aristotle studied in Athens under Plato. He joined the ACADEMIA, the school founded by Plato. During 20 Years he attended Plato’s Classes, but when Plato died, he founded his own philosophical school, the LYCEUM.

He and his followers were known as PERIPATETICS (“walking over” in Greek). Aristotle had the custom of walking around while teaching.

After Plato’s death, Aristotle took distance from his idealism.

His philosophy is more realistic than Plato’s. As you can see in Raffaello’s famous version of the School of Athens, Aristotle prefers to stay on the ground while Plato is pointing to that world of pure forms above our physical existence. Aristotle had both feet on earth. He was also more scientific and systematic than his master. He didn’t write dialogues, but serious treatises about different topics.

For Aristotle, only scientific demonstration and the analysis of formal logic is the source of true knowledge. He became critical with Plato’s theory of forms, a world of pure ideas, as the only source of true knowledge.

Aristotle wrote important – really standard books in the three main disciplines of knowledge at that time: Physics, Ethic and Logic.

Rhetoric is a discipline between Logic and the Ethic.

On Rhetoric

Aristotle defined Rhetoric as:

“Finding in any given case of creating a message the available means of persuasion.”

The book is a systematic approach to the psychological mechanisms that can help influence people’s ideas, attitudes or behaviors. In this regard, he continued the work of the sophist in a more scientific way. What we, scholars in the field of strategic communication are doing now, is basically the same. Our research and teaching focuses on strategies and techniques to produce more effective messages.

Rhetoric, the art of persuasion, is not – or not necessarily – a form of manipulation. Aristotle thought that it is helpful to reach the excellence in the public discourse because this excellence could be used at the service of the Polis. Communication is consequently a valuable instrument to solve problems and to efficiently manage issues in the community.

Aristotle established three main APPLICATIONS FIELDS of the Rhetorical Discourse.

Deliberative Oratory: The type of rhetoric you will use in the political discourse, that means for Aristotle in the service of the POLIS, the community, and not to obtain personal power of influence. This was for Aristotle the most important and transcendent use of rhetoric.
We saw that the true virtue was for the ancient Greeks to offer the own knowledge, the own skills to the benefit of the public.

Epideictic Oratory: The rhetorical discourse created to praise – and also to blame – someone. The communication techniques used in ceremonies, in funerals and any public event. This type of discourse is also useful because with Rhetoric you can honor those who serve or have been serving the Polis – and on the other hand can denounce those who may become harmful for the community.

Forensic Oratory: The last kind of rhetorical discourse is the so-called forensic oratory. Aristotle described here the communication strategies used in the administration of justice, in the courtroom. There are two subcategories of forensic oratory: the KATEGORIA, communication techniques used to accuse, and the APOLOGIA, the discourse of the defenders.

Still, the most celebrated chapter in Aristotle’s On Rhetoric deals with the so-called Artistic Proofs.

The artistic proofs are three main ways to influence audiences. Every artistic proof emphasizes an element that becomes the key to construct the effectiveness of the persuasive message.

The three artistic proofs are LOGOS, PATHOS and ETHOS.

LOGOS: In the case of LOGOS, the first artistic proof, the effectiveness of the persuasive message relays on the soundness of the logical arguments. Messages are carefully crafted to avoid any logical weakness. When a persuader uses LOGOS, s/he expects the audience to critically analyze the logic of the message. Thus, the communication moment involves the activation of the audience’s cognitive potential.

PATHOS: The second artistic proof explores the psychology of emotions. In this case, the speaker uses strong emotions to put the audience “in the right frame of mind”. Once this goal is reached, it is easier to influence the judgment of the people in a particular issue.

ETHOS: Aristotle describes the last of the artistic proofs, ETHOS, as the psychology of good character. The credibility of the speaker plays an essential role in the final effect of the persuasive message. Aristotle differentiates three constituents part of the ETHOS, or the credibility of the speaker: PHRONESIS (intelligence, good sense); ARETE (virtue); EUNOIA (good will).