(Part 2) Best rhetoric books according to redditors

Jump to the top 20

We found 192 Reddit comments discussing the best rhetoric books. We ranked the 100 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the products ranked 21-40. You can also go back to the previous section.

Next page

Top Reddit comments about Rhetoric:

u/lunarunicorn · 9 pointsr/biology

Costs of sequencing DNA have gone down dramatically over the past decade. Creating a catalog of genetic sequences is now more feasible, technically speaking, than ever before. However there is more to understanding an organism than just its genetic sequence. Epigenetics play an important piece in how the genetic sequence of an organism gets translated into function. It is a much more time-consuming and costly endeavor to profile the entire epigenetic landscape of an organism.

The other problem, which can't be solved with money, is the problem of accessing Earth's biodiversity. There are some governments that view cataloging DNA of their biodiverse environments (like the rainforests in Brazil) as bio-colonialism and are therefore opposed to it. The politics of this situation is explored in the book On The Frontier of Science.

So where does that leave feasibility? Technologically, its possible. Funding-wise, DNA sequencing is probably possible, but epigenetics complicates this. But due to global politics, its unlikely that a complete catalog could be achieved.

u/literallyobjectively · 6 pointsr/Rhetoric

Yeah, Burke was essentially regarded as a god of rhetoric in all the classes I took at university -- up there with Aristotle, Cicero, Fisher, and Bitzer.


I would personally recommend Sonja K. Foss, more specifically one of the texts we used in a class called "Rhetorical Analysis and Public Discourse" - Sonja K. Foss - Rhetorical Criticism: Exploration and Practice [The book is a bit pricey but you can probably find it used and likely find many of the essays contained within online]


Foss breaks down the processes of rhetoric, then tackles the most commonly used rhetorical analysis techniques and provides examples and a framework for each. This book really helped me view rhetoric from both sides, as an author/rhetorician and as an audience member/rhetorical critic. Even if you're well-studied on rhetorical tactics, this book can help you understand it from both sides, as well as give you excellent guidelines to work within and a good history of the branches and aspects of rhetoric.

Cheers.

u/Gleanings · 5 pointsr/freemasonry

It's the standard, "Hey, guys. Yeah, the other side is going all Alinsky/Rules for Radicals and kicking ass. But you shouldn't match their tone and fight back, because that would be actually using the 2nd Liberal Art and Science that masons esteem so much. Instead, you should be uncontroversial, ineffective, and Lose With Dignity^TM ."

Masonry has pledged to not interfere with my relationship with God, my country, my neighbors, my family, or myself.

The instant masonic leadership attempts to tell membership how they may participate in government and politics, they are in violation of their masonic vows to the membership.



u/Hermy_One · 4 pointsr/fantasywriters

A word of caution: while /u/ProbableWalrus has succeeded in making your first few paragraphs more interesting, his version is still error-ridden. You'll need a solid understanding of grammar and punctuation if you want to get published.

I think Martha Kolln's Rhetorical Grammar would help you tremendously. It provides a thorough-but-accessible overview of modern phrase-structure grammar, favoring critical, rhetorical decision-making over rote memorization. If you're interested in something more advanced, Steven Pinker's The Sense of Style is also wonderful. Pinker is on the cutting edge of modern linguistics.

u/mantra · 3 pointsr/programming

Strictly the first isn't punctuated correctly or it's just wrong - it's two separate clauses and should be written as:

"I want to know: how does the wheel work?"

or

"I want to know; how does the wheel work?"

It really doesn't work otherwise, as written. Especially not without the "?"

The second is more natural English in a declarative way. It is two clauses as well but doesn't require any additional punctuation.

"I want to know how the wheel works."

"works" by itself is perfectly sufficient alone as the verb for the clause. "does work" is redundant - either it is the "work" (function) or its not with just "work".

At best, "does" is sort of an emphatic or particle, with or without the (semi)colon. But like most emphatic/particle words, you have to be careful with how you use them (think "doch" in German). A better choice of emphatic would be:

"I want to know how the wheel really works."

which might be spoken:

"I want to know how the wheel really works."

The reason this sounds better is that "really" is an adverb modifying "works" while "does" is a helping verb for "works" which changes the meaning and structure to something different and interrogative.

If you want to really grok this kind of thing, the two best sources are Strunk and White's Elements of Style (PDF!), and Warriner's English Grammar and Composition. The latter sort of reminds me of a typical programming language book in some ways - nitty-gritty with syntax definitions - they call it "sentence diagramming" but it's really just a alternate visual form of syntax BNF.

Had both of these in high school. Everyone kept both in their book bag all the time. You'd be marked off on grammar on anything written in any class. Very helpful as reference "bibles" for writing English. Yes, my high school was somewhat intense (by US standards, anyway).

u/Vespertine · 2 pointsr/AskAcademia

How have you approached your other essays? Did you do them last minute, slow and steadily, or in bursts? How did you do?

If you've ever written anything at the last minute, you'll probably have faced the feeling of "oh bugger, this is actually really interesting, I wish I had more time to explore x y and z, and when I wasn't struggling to stay awake". Be nice to yourself by giving yourself as much time as you still can within reason, and trying not to put yourself through that.

Know how you work as an individual and if you don't neatly fit the boxes in guides, do what works for you.

Just write down your thoughts on what you've researched so far: if some of it's essay paragraphs, if some of it's bullet points, and other bits pasted quotations, that's okay. You just need to make a start and start getting used to the little world of the topic, writing about it and researching further when you see you need to. Don't get hung up on structure, you can tidy that up later when you've got more comfortable with the work.

Do a bibliography early and keep track of it as you go along. Add books you've used and get the referencing format the tutors want. Record your sources. It's awful trying to find where something was from weeks later. Finer points of referencing (all the full stops and commas in the right place, attributes in the right order; how do you reference a graph from a blog anyway) is something you can re-check and tidy when you're stalled or a bit tired.

You'll have written this much in wordcount over 3 or 4 termly essays before, it's definitely possible.

This book is very good on constructing arguments: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Writing-Essays-students-English-humanities-ebook/dp/B0171ZQSZM/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

People have certainly got firsts on dissertations done in less than a month. Not everyone does, but it's possible.

u/albyssa · 2 pointsr/LearnJapanese

Oh my, big passive voice fan? Let’s see, where to start?

> There are also times when passive voice is preferred

I did say that, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s usually not preferred. It’s preferred when there is no known actor or when the main subject is not the actor.

> Non-psychologists tend to ignore the American Psychological Association’s style guide, yes.

APA is used for a lot more fields than just psychology, including scientific ones. Besides, most style guides say the same thing. AP does, and I’m pretty sure Chicago does.


>And are you seriously citing style guides to make a point about natural language? Yes, prescriptivists tend to dislike passive voice in English. How is that at all relevant?

AP and APA actually cite natural usage as a reason for proscribing against passive voice. The active voice is more natural in most cases and is the way we tend to talk. Therefore, using active voice is better for clarity. Clear writing is good writing.

But this isn’t a subreddit on writing. This is a sub about learning Japanese. The meme we’re commenting on is about things that are difficult for Japanese learners whose native language is English. Passive voice in Japanese is difficult for many English-speaking learners for all the reasons I mentioned. If you want to keep using it in your English writing anyway, I mean, whatever floats your boat. I do recommend picking up On Writing Well, though, and maybe also The Elements of Style. They’re excellent books that I think can explain better than I can why some of these kinds of things that seem “prescriptivist” are actually ways to make your writing clearer, more succinct, and, ultimately, more successful.

u/victor271828459045 · 2 pointsr/brasil

Pode ser que seja este: https://www.amazon.com/101-Habits-Highly-Successful-Novelists/dp/1598695894

Mas não tenho certeza, eu li em pdf, não tinha capa, era basicamente o título e só.

u/buzzcut · 2 pointsr/writing

That's a good book. It's more of a reference.

You might also consider Farnsworth , or Arthur Quinn. Less of a guidebook, but interesting nonetheless is Words Like Loaded Pistols. This may be overkill for you, but there is a very good section in the last 1/3 of this book that is very good: Classical Rhetoric. There are lots and lots more depending how much you want to get into it.

u/Cammorak · 2 pointsr/IWantToLearn

Well, are you a good writer? I recommend this book quite often, but look up Rhetorical Grammar by Kolln and Gray. If you're not very good at grammar or writing in general, you're going to need a lot of practice before that book becomes useful. But what that book will teach you is how to use sentence patterns and grammar to impart extra meaning and emphasize certain features. So basically, delivery.

Any comedian can tell you that the power of a joke is all in its delivery. In writing, your delivery is how you construct the prose. Terry Pratchett is really a master of this. The greatest pun I've ever read was from him, and there was like 5 pages of setup in which I never expected the pun, but then suddenly, there it was and it was perfect.

Also, unless you're Terry Pratchett, avoid puns.

u/AncientHistory · 2 pointsr/writing

> How do I improve my writing (both critical and creative)?

Read more, write more. In your case, I think you probably want to focus less on creative writing and more on technical and business writing, which are very different beasts.

> What books should I look at to help me do this?

The Elements of Style is a good start. You might also get some use out of Understanding Rhetoric

> When trying to interpret and "look into" a text how do I do that very well?

You need to consider the text on several levels: What is the text telling you? How is the text telling you that? What does the author want you to take away from the text? Is there a subtext (i.e. an implicit message in the text that is not spelled out) or any symbolism in the text?

> What would you say is the greatest misconception about the process of creative writing?

That there is one process. Creative writing is as varied as the number of creative writers there are out there, and not every technique and approach will work for you. From the sound of it, just in terms of a college application essay and a desire to enter the business world, you don't really need to focus on creative writing - you want to focus on rhetoric, persuasive writing, and technical communication.

u/collegestudent4 · 1 pointr/grammar

I'd check out Warriner's. It's a good continuing textbook style grammar book. I used the Warriner's series through middle and high school. It's a little old, but the grammar hasn't changed. You can probably find a pdf on the internet somewhere. Haven't found it on a non-torrenting site yet. Definitely worth the investment.


Amazon Link of Book I Had in Middle School

Amazon Link for the Complete Guide

Edit: More links

PDF for some overview and practice

Punctuation and Such Guide

u/bizzlefarp · 1 pointr/AskReddit

Damn. I love the dedication you have to the thread!

With communication you have noticeably different methods of speaking to another person (interpersonal), a speech (small group and organizational), and a large group (mass). I think the greatest number of people deal solely in the interpersonal category and so it becomes more important.

So, yes, I think taking time to focus on interpersonal communication gives a person time to develop their ability to listen and communicate. Communication is just as much about listening as it is speaking. You learn to hears one's thoughts, interpret them, and give your thoughts.

Logic plays into this because much of speech, especially when it is persuasive speech, requires a structure of facts. If A and B then C.

Rhetoric delves deeper into the meaning and the way that people are trying to speak to you. Good example would be the use of a tricolon: "Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears." Examining that you might notice how awesome it sounds. How it pulls you in. The speaker speaks to everyone calling them a friend of his. Then he appeals to their nationality. Then he appeals to their status. He hits them at an emotional level. On top of that (and I think this is so cool), he says Friends (one syllable), Romans (two syllables), countrymen (three syllables). It just pleases the ears in every way.

Sorry, I get passionate about communication. But to answer your question more concisely, yes, I feel interpersonal communication is better for learning to communicate effectively than a public speaking course. It develops a good foundation is communication thst will benefit a public speech.

Edit: I actually posted this comment on /r/rhetoric earlier and thought maybe you could get some use from it if you were interested.

My favorite rhetoric book is Words Like Loaded Pistols by Sam Leith. He writes in such an understanble way and really pulls you in. The books begins with the basics and Aristotle and moves through speakers and pop culture references that it me quite interested.

Sam Leith actually wrote a great analysis of Barak Obama's second inaugural speech.

u/broomhahaha · 1 pointr/writing

Have fun! If you don't enjoy writing, the act of writing, then walk away and find something you really enjoy. But if your joy really is writing, here's my basic concept of 'writing' and the resources that helped me develop that ideology.

Writing is a medium, that means it's a way to telepathically communicate with someone. When you write, you cannot ignore the reader! The first way you consider the reader is by being aware of the rules of the medium (this is still the level I'm at!) They fall into three categories: grammar, sentence structure, and paragraph construction.

To understand grammar, read 'Strunk and White's Elements of Style.' This will tell you everything you need to know to get started (grammar never ends, I've heard stories of poets who abandoned the craft for linguistics after studying grammar for too long.) Know it, but don't be intimidated by it!

Sentence structure came next for me, and was a little bit more abstract. I took a Coursera course called 'writing in the sciences.' This one (free!) class has improved my writing more than anything else.

Paragraph construction is when the rules just start fing each other. I have been reading through an old text book called 'Form and Thought in Prose,' I have the 1960 edition but there might be later editions that are worth checking out. Specifically the introduction to part 2 blew me away. If you don't want to buy it, a great place to start is the essay "Politics and the English Language" by George "1,984 Farm Animals" Orwell.

These have all improved my enjoyment of the act of writing, and so I recommend them. But they come with the caveat that if you try to follow this advice and you find yourself hating writing or getting intimidated, stop immediately and PM me a f
off.

u/Luxopathos · 1 pointr/writing
u/Marshmlol · 1 pointr/WTF

I'm laughing at your "inspiration" analogous example. It makes no sense. Why are you even talking about "inspiration"? And how people illegally download music?

By your logic your claiming that Shitty_Watercolour(the song writer) did the same thing that the person who took his picture is doing(illegally download music), which is, take credit for someones art. Did he ever do that?

If so, you must know him at a personal level, because I've never seen him post anything that hasn't been his.

And hey, if a song writer wants credit for his song, by your logic, he should say "written and sung by (insert name here)" at the end of every song. No?...

Can you just imagine? that would be fucking annoying, hearing the name of every singer at the end of every song on the radio.

Here's two books you might want to consider buying before using faulty analogous examples:

T.Edward Damer's Attacking Faulty Reasoning

and

James Herrick's Argumentation

Enjoy! It might help you earn that High School Diploma your struggling to earn.

u/oofig · 1 pointr/bestof

If you are genuinely interested in an academic, rhetorician's analysis of that particular type of protest, you should check this book out: https://www.amazon.com/Nonviolence-Aint-What-Used-Insurrection/dp/1849352291

It can be a little dense at times, but I think it does a pretty good job of examining the phenomenon.

u/OneArmedNoodler · 1 pointr/Firearms

What does that have to do with "libtards" that can't identify guns or restrictions on "assault rifles"? Just another mindless sheep who can't debate me on facts, so you try to bait and switch me... sorry son, I'm not biting. Get dictionary, a thesaurus, and read this then come back when you can actually stay on topic in a coherent fashion.

u/binx85 · 1 pointr/Rhetoric

A major term you'd probably be really interested in reading more about is autopoiesis (also understood as "self-styling"). Rhetorical Deliver and Visual Rhetoric would also help you. Finally, Material Rhetoric will help you understand how clothing (among tons of other materials) can be constructed and used rhetorically.

Understanding Rhetoric is a really simple straightforward book that will give you the basics. There are SO many books on the subject though. Google Scholar is your best friend here. Just search the keywords and then read the abstracts and conclusion of the articles you think sound interesting. Once you really find an article that appeals to you, look at their works cited/bibliography and then read those books. That is how you read like an academic.

This is way larger than you realize. Performance is a huuuuuge part of rhetoric. What have you read so far? What are you really interested in investigating? What kind of agenda are you pursuing?

I teach Rhet. to Freshman so if you give me a little bit more I can probably help you out.

Good Luck. Let me know if I can help you further.

Edit: These online scholarly journals will also keep you up to date on the most recent/contemporary rhetorical research:

Harlot

Kairos

Enculturation

u/wegweaerf · 1 pointr/reddit.com

is this supposed to discredit me? or rather intimidate me? you know where i live now? how i look while sleeping? i don't really get the point.

but generally i really appreciate your valuable input. a mixture of grammar-nazi, love-it-or-leave-it redneck and i-know-who-you-are stalker-creep is something no discussion should lack oh mighty master of rhetorics.
you really did search me on the net to find something you could use against me??? isn't this a little pathetic? other people use arguments. you should give it a try!
http://www.amazon.com/Rhetoric-Aristotle/dp/1604597690/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1247679624&sr=1-6

u/Infintinity · 0 pointsr/atheism

Maybe you haven't read this book. I haven't but maybe you can tell me if it's about how all communication is argumentative.
If you want to be facetious, that's on you.