Rhetiroc Assignment

1. Hi everyone! My name is Casey. Im a Secondary Ed. English major. I am hoping to get certification once i graduate so I can teach phys ed. Kutztown does not have that here so it was either go for another 2 years and re-do everything, or put what I already learned towards getting my BA in Sec Ed English and then just go back and get certified in phys ed.

2. I enjoyed certain parts of the reading assignment. But like Christina had mentioned in an earlier post, I found it a little hard to follow at times. By not directly talking about rhetoric, he was leading me into several directions, one after another, to come to my own conclusion. I did not enjoy this method. I did however enjoy learning about how Socrates would manipulate Sophists' (rhetoricians) and their statements to bring them to a whole other conclusion, which was oposite of the original statement they had made. The way Ramage explains how rhetoricians 'promote what suits his interests' and Socrates promotes the Truth 'whoever it suites or doesnt suit.' This does however make me question rhetoric and its moral purpose. It seems that the art of using rhetoric is based off of the beliefs and wants of one person, not necessarily what it best for the whole. And I do believe Ramage touches significantly on this when talking about gravitas. He claims it is not something possessed by a large number of those who practice rhetoric. I thoroughly enjoyed reading how Roethke shows us how oppositions may only be illusions. I find it funny how Ramage explains rhetoric using fast food chains and small unique diners. It broke rhetoric down into something that was much more easy to understand. I felt he drew out certain points he was trying to make, way beyond the attention span of someone reading this who was not assigned the first chapter. Overall I did feel it was a little long for trying to indirectly explain rhetoric, but I did however enjoy it.