A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosophers and linguists who affected to develop a scientific analysis of

admin2012-05-18  35

问题     A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosophers and linguists who affected to develop a scientific analysis of human thought and behavior in the early part of this century. Under the force of this view, it was perhaps inevitable that the art of rhetoric should pass from the status of being regarded as of questionable worth (because although it might be both a source of pleasure and a means to urge people to right action, it might also be a means to distort truth and a source of misguided action) to the status of being wholly condemned. If people are regarded only as machines guided by logic as they were be these "scientistic"thinkers, rhetoric is likely to be held in low regard: for the most obvious truth about rhetoric is that it speaks to the whole person. It presents its arguments first to the person as a rational being, because persuasive discourse, if honestly conceived, always has a basis in reasoning. Logical argument is the plot, as it were, of any speech or essay that is respectfully intended to persuade people. Yet it is a characterizing feature of rhetoric that it goes beyond this and appeals to the parts of our nature that are involved in feeling, desiring, acting, and suffering. It recalls relevant instances of the emotional reactions of people to. circumstances real or fictional—that are similar to our own circumstances. Such is the purpose of both historical accounts and fables in persuasive discourse: they indicate literally or symbolically how people may react emotionally, with hope or fear, to particular circumstances. A speech attempting to persuade people can achieve little unless it takes into account the aspect of their being related to such hopes and fears.
    Rhetoric, then, is addressed to human beings living at particular times and in particular places. From the point of view of rhetoric, we are not merely logical thinking machines, creatures abstracted from time and space. The study of rhetoric should therefore be considered the most humanistic of the humanities, since rhetoric is not directed only to our rational selves. It takes into account what the "scientistic"view leaves out. If it is a weakness to harbor feelings, then rhetoric may be thought of as dealing in weakness. But those who reject the idea of rhetoric because they believe it deals in lies and who at the same time hope to move people to action, must either be liars themselves or be very naive; pure logic has never been a motivating force unless it has been subordinated to human purposes, feelings, and desires, and thereby ceased to be pure logic.
The passage suggests that a speech that attempts to persuade people to act is likely to fail if it does NOT______.

选项 A、distort the truth a little to make it more acceptable to the audience
B、appeal to the self-interest as well as the humanitarianism of the audience
C、address listeners’ emotions as well as their intellects
D、concede the logic of other points of view

答案C

解析 推断题,原文第一段指出,修辞学首先向作为理性的人(as a rational being)提出论点(arguments),因为有说服力的讲话和文章(persuasive discourse),假如诚实表达(if honestly conceived)。总是以推理为基础(a basisin reasoning)。在认真想说服人的讲话或文章中逻辑论点就好比在船舶航线上的标绘图。可是修辞学的特点(acharacterizing feature)是要超出这一点(goes beyond this),而诉诸(appeals to)与情感、希望、行动和苦难有关的(involved in feeling,desiring,acting and suffering)的人的本性那部分(the parts of our nature)。原文第一段最后句又指出,一个企图说服人的演说,除非考虑到(unless it takes into account)同这种希望和担心相关联的人的这个方面(the aspect of their being related to such hopes and fears)收效是不会很大的(can achieve little)。由此可以推论,企图说服人行动的演说如果做不到不但针对(address)着听众的逻辑推理的智力(intellects)而且针对听众的情感(emotions)那么很可能要失败(likely to fail)。这是C的内容。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/1WjYFFFM
0

最新回复(0)