Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca

More new terms. Olbrechts-Tyteca’s "new approach to rhetoric" offered a theory that suggested values and facts should be weighed realistically. I found the section delineating the differences between "argumentation and logic" fairly interesting (though I had never in my life heard the two terms explained as they were). Some points were made that distinguished between the two. Argumentation:

1. Uses natural, ambiguous language
2. Attempt to gain audience adherence to a claim
3. Focuses on the "reasonable" which is concerned with the common-sense and practical side of rhetoric
4. Personal
5. Is a "person-centered activity"
6. Is not focused on calculation but rather on an observance of the thesis, "which presupposes a ‘meeting of minds’
7. Concern with audience

There was a detailed focus on audience, as Olbrechts-Tyteca believed that it was "necessary for argumentation to occur" in order to bring about a sense of agreement. The theories of Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca seem to have been influential in developing ideas of rhetoric, though much still remains to be explored and understood.