Affect (rhetoric)

Affect, as a term of rhetoric, is the responsive, emotional feeling (affect) that precedes cognition.[1] Affect differs from pathos as described by Aristotle as one of the modes of proof[2] and pathos as described by Jasinski as an emotional appeal[3] because it is “the response we have to things before we label that response with feelings or emotions.”[4]

This article is about the word as used in rhetoric. For psychological description of affect, see Affect (psychology). For other uses, see Affect (disambiguation).

In further exploring this term, scholars recognized affect’s rhetorical role in literature,[5] photography,[6][7] marketing[8] and memory.[9] In 2012, Rogers described how author W. E. B. Du Bois used the structure of his work, The Souls of Black Folk, to affect his audience into feeling shame.[10] In 2016, Brunner and Deluca proposed the term affective winds to describe “the force of images that moves people to engage and interact by exploring the affective potency of visual arguments.”[11] Affective winds were part of the rhetorical persuasiveness of images shared through social media. In a different sense, Harold described how the Target Corporation’s advertising used aura and affect to democratize the appearance of some products.[12] Affect has also been identified as a conduit through which rhetorical memories can be internalized.[13]

Drawing from philosophy, some[14][15] rhetorical studies of affect have followed Martin Heidegger's articulation of Dasein which posits "affect" as the ground of reason. Others[16] follow post-structuralist and post-Heideggerian insights to follow affect's influence on rhetorical canons and digital rhetoric.

References
  1. Brunner, E., & Deluca, K. (2016). The argumentative force of image networks: Greenpeace's panmediated global detox campaign. Argumentation and Advocacy, 52(4), 281.
  2. Aristotle (2001). Pathos. In Bizzell, P. & Herzberg, B. (Eds.). The rhetorical tradition: Readings from classical times to the present. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's.
  3. Jasinski, J. (2001). Pathos. Sourcebook on rhetoric: Key concepts in contemporary rhetorical studies. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
  4. Harold, Christine. (2009). On target: Aura, affect, and the rhetoric of "design democracy". Public Culture, 21(3), 599.
  5. Rogers, M. (2012). The people, rhetoric, and affect: On the political force of du bois's the souls of black folk. American Political Science Review, 106(1), 188-203.
  6. Brunner, E., & Deluca, K. (2016). The argumentative force of image networks: Greenpeace's panmediated global detox campaign. Argumentation and Advocacy, 52(4), 281.
  7. Murray, J. (2009). Nondiscursive rhetoric: Image and affect in multimodal composition. Ithaca, NY, USA: State University of New York Press.
  8. Harold, Christine. (2009). On target: Aura, affect, and the rhetoric of "design democracy". Public Culture, 21(3), 599.
  9. Pruchnic, J., & Lacey, K. (2011). The future of forgetting: Rhetoric, memory, affect. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 41(5), 472-494.
  10. Rogers, M. (2012). The people, rhetoric, and affect: On the political force of du bois's the souls of black folk. American Political Science Review, 106(1), 188-203.
  11. Brunner, E., & Deluca, K. (2016). The argumentative force of image networks: Greenpeace's panmediated global detox campaign. Argumentation and Advocacy, 52(4), 281.
  12. Harold, Christine. (2009). On target: Aura, affect, and the rhetoric of "design democracy". Public Culture, 21(3), 599.
  13. Pruchnic, J., & Lacey, K. (2011). The future of forgetting: Rhetoric, memory, affect. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 41(5), 472-494.
  14. Rickert, Thomas. (2013). Ambient Rhetoric: The Attunements of Rhetorical Being. U of Pittsburgh Press.
  15. Gross, Daniel. (2006). The secret history of emotion: From Aristotle's Rhetoric to modern brain science. Berkeley: U of California Press.
  16. Pruchnic, Jeff and Kim Lacey. "The Future of Forgetting: Rhetoric, Memory, Affect. "Rhetoric Society Quarterly" 41.4 (2011), 1-23.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.