2. 职称英语
  3. A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosophers and linguis

A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosophers and linguis

游客2023-12-14  33
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. [br] According to the passage, to reject rhetoric and still hope to persuade people is______.
选项 A、an aim of most speakers and writers
B、an indication either of dishonesty or of credulity .
C、a way of displaying distrust of the audience’s motives
D、a characteristic of most humanistic discourse
答案 B
解析 细节题，原文第二段指出：修辞学考虑到(takes into account)“科学”观点所没有考虑到的方面(what the“scientistic”view leaves out)。如果说怀有情感(to harbor feelings)是个弱点的话，那么修辞可 以看成是(may be thought of as)讨论(dealing in)弱点的学科。但是，那些认为修辞学讨论撒谎(deals inlies)而摈弃(reject)修辞思想同时又想推动人们行为(hope to move people to action)的人，想必他们自己就是撒谎者(liars)或者是太天真了(very naive)。这就是B的内容：摈弃修辞学而仍想说服人的人是一种不诚实(dishonesty)的表现，或者是一种轻信credulity(即太天真的同义表达)的表现(an indication)。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3271589.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)