Newman, Aristotle, and Me

It seems a logical pursuit for Sarah Newman to discover the relationship between Aristotle's 'On Rhetoric' and Scientific and Technical Communication. Aristotle's rhetorical theory expresses "effective communication is a systematic tekhne/art," Which provides a classical base for contemporary students to explore the relationship between theory and practice. This might be more interesting if we were able to discern the importance of knowing whether or not rhetoric, as Aristotle believed it to be, is an art, therefore, systematic and teachable, and Scientific and Technical Communication can be viewed this same way.

Newman explores such questions as: "is Scientific and Technical Communication a systematic and teachable ability to respond individually to each contingent communicative situation? In what sense...are the various kinds of technical documents persuasive?" I found her example of how she goes about exploring these questions with her students using 'On Rhetoric' interesting. She uses an example of working with warning labels and instructions -- written documents that are very important for people to understand, and trying to figure out if Aristotle would agree with the class assessment that if a problem occurred that the fault (morally, etc.) would lie with those who used it, designed it, or the company who produced the product with the label or instructions. For me, this helped provide me with something concrete; some perspective to assist my reading of Aristotle and rhetoric as he saw it to be.

Aristotle is breaking things down into a framework for how to apply rhetoric, or how to understand what and how rhetoric is. His listing of logos/evidence (proofs/appeals), pathos/emotions, ethos/character and the additional considerations of arrangement and choice of language helps Newman relate the process of Aristotle's rhetoric with the scientific approach, and subject matter of her class.

Ultimately, I can see how Aristotle's writing on rhetoric can remain relevant today. There is room for it and its theories in a number of academic disciplines including: Scientific and technical Communication, composition, philosophy, rhetoric among others. Yet, it may not be the best, or only text in which to consult for whatever related subject matter. It is much too dense and, perhaps, incomplete -- it certainly didn't help Newman write a clear, easy to understand article, nor is it clear-cut in its overall usefulness or direct application towards the subject matter, whatever it may be. It might be best used as an interesting guide or supplemental piece.