Couples basket weaving might be nice. That is a video of Lloyd and Mrs. Beige doing Mesopotamian basket weaving together...not Lloyd weaving baskets made of couples.
Only slightly off-topic but look up a channel called Primitive Technology. You will never spend so much time watching a guy in shorts alone in the woods not say anything and be enthralled the whole time.
Me: I'm only watching this if it's sponsored by The Great Courses Plus. "...this video which has been sponsored by The Great Courses Plus." Gets popcorn
... You honestly choose not to watch videos if they are not sponsored? This is the very first time I read something remotely like this, be it serious or in jest. Have a lovely day!
My chemistry teacher did the silence thing all the time when we were in our teenage years - and accordingly annoying, especially paired with chemicals and Bunsenburners - and it worked better than every other method teachers tried. I am convinced that it has made an impression on all of us.
I've been in favour for a long time of teaching children in schools to interpret statistics properly and to dismantle bad arguments and reason logically (and most importantly recognise fallacious arguments). Mostly for the political reasons. Because you can't have a healthy democracy where the people elected actually represent people's best interests if people are not sufficiently educated to figure out what those interests are or who's representing them. And if the politicians aren't incentivised to defend themselves through logic, but instead to vaccuous arguments and platitudes. Because that's part of the problem. They work so politicians use them. Let's put a bigger focus on this in education and make them not work anymore. Only then will they stop using them and only then does democracy have a chance of rising above people's worst instincts and actually working towards the good of all.
I know more about my political oppositional parties' ideology (and it isn't an exhaustive amount) than my friends that support them. Nobody even puts in the time to read their own manifesti, they literally can't even be bothered to huff their own farts let alone anothers'.
Isn't it proven by some (3 or 4) public educated generations that one can't achieve medium standards needed to discern very bad rhetorics? Who's in charge? - Stupid. Don't know, are you allowed to say this in free speech Britain.
Postmodernism is the biggest enemy of reason. The notion that there's no such thing as objective truth wipes out the possibility for truth, and the companion notion that all truth is subjective is too often in practice turned around into the notion that all my subjective feelings and inclinations are general truths. -- Humans may not be able to create absolute truths, but however imperfect our truths are, some are better, in a practical sense, than others, because they work better in describing realities more or less accurately, in ways that are useful for other people. -- Imagine a world without truth. This is the world of postmodernists, and for postmodernists, the only function of dialogue is to manipulate other people. What else is left, if there's no truth to pursue, refine, or communicate? -- Feminist theory, critical race theory, queer theory, and recent Marxist theory are heavily influenced by postmodernism, and it should come as no surprise that the "research" that spews forth from them is rarely true or valuable.
Perhaps make it compulsory for all secondary school kids to read "How to lie with statistics", though perhaps it could have more modern examples. Most people have no idea about variability in populations. When they leave school they forget about standard deviation and variance, and all those little things that tell you how reliable the figures are that people (e.g. politicians) throw at you.
@@fransmars1645 yeah whatever, but even if, it's still a 33 minute video. Even if it was his 7th take, it might be even more impressive what kind of effort he puts into making these. Not to mention that he said somewhere that he doesn't do multiple takes, I think at least
I'm a software engineeer. I spend most of my day writing code. Still; rhetoric is possibly the best course I've ever taken. I had no idea it was such an amazing subject before I started. I think it should be required in high school. I took "speech" instead because it's what my school required. It's night-and-day different from a proper schooling in rhetoric. I think requiring rhetoric lessons would go a long way towards making Internet discourse a better experience. I've been pushing the fine folks at Crash Course to do CC Rhetoric for the past year now. It might just happen.
In essence, I agree. But nah, on the lower rungs, it's more like 70/30 solutions-to-convincing. It's not until your superiors are not themselves engineers that you really need to weave a story. Of course, there are exceptions, usually involving your superiors being really crummy engineers. But rhetoric absolutely is a huge help in securing that job in the first place. And that is indeed a critical skill in the realm. Being good in interviews is a valuable skill that lots of software people aren't so hot at. And in helping with interviews myself, a lot of it involves reminding yourself how bad many very talented software people can be in interviews. If it turns out they write good readable code, then I'm happy. Being able to explain why their code is good is just icing on the cake.
Very interesting! I'm actually learning something! Your discourse is not only long but also informative. I'm almost capable of getting past the incessant blabbering. Thank you!
I'm also a software engineer. However, in my case my bosses typically know the area better than I do, in which case all my employer is interested in is me just doing as I'm told. However, when I was freelancing and in job interviews etc, the power of speech is vital! It is very helpful indeed.
Never forget you're doing informatics. It's all about knowing what you're doing, and knowledge is formed by language,. Rethorics is one approach to this, but there are more, just as valuable.
Lloyd with your elegant voice and debonair demeanor, you'd make a great teacher of rhetoric for the Great Courses Plus. *(That was flattery btw- it's an appeal to an emotion)*
I may be imagining things, but isn't It an amzing coincidence that as soon as education started being open to the lower clases rethoric disapeared from school curriculums.
What an incredibly classist statement on your part. A serious reason for why the UK is no longer an empire but more like a failing bank. Where they have lots of upper crust types behaving dishonestly, but at least they have the proper accent, right?
5 лет назад
[citation needed] aka: ¿Where did you get that information from?
As an american I had a teacher that taught almost exclusively rhetoric in my high school English class. It isn't the standard here for that to happen but I specifically remember how much fun the class actually was because of it. We'd go through controversial speeches and articles and every sentence someone would shout out a rhetorical device used, and then we would apply the concepts learned to a class debate about the topic. Breaking down weak arguments and discovering ways of using rhetoric to further our own was incredibly useful and enjoyable, and I still use what I learned from that one class today. Great vid as always Lindy!
11:05 Holy shit, when you went quiet you got my attention opposed to your shouting before it... Thats crazy. Next time I am presenting something I'll be sure to use that trick.
A magician taught Hitler the same technique, it's easiest to notice in his first speech to a rabid Nazi audience right after he was elected Chancellor. It's eerie how well it works.
gets me no matter how many times i've seen this. i'm already anticipating the point but i have to look up to see if my phone froze or something. just to see lindy cradling patiently. sly bugger.
We, here in Greece, are taught the most basic of rhetoric in school, so as to right the most convincing essay. Sometimes there are task where we have to actually come up with false, yet seeming like true, arguements. Σοφίσματα
@Opperturk It can be translated as "forgery puzzle" . Sophismata is an argument entailing falsehood for educational purposes. Not sure, but I think the etymons (a.k.a etyms) of the word itself can be distinguished as follows : _sophos_ (wisedom) + _-ma_ (suffix for the outcome of an action or process) + _-ta_ (suffix for an intervening agent either personal or not). So, semantically speaking, we can say _sophismata_ it's a "sophism agent" or more precisely "a device or construct that entails a sophism" (here 'sophism' doesn't have its original meaning of, let's say, "axiom of wisdom" but the derogatory meaning of "falsehood" or "forgery" because of historical reasons) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophismata my regards 🇦🇷
Razar Campbell enthusiastic, knowledgeable, insightful, try a to be honest, not arrogant, doesn't come across as understanding it, very relatable, humour without trying too hard. A Fantastic watch
Death to tyrants! Long live the Republic! Ave Cicero! My first introduction to Cicero was his spirited defense of the right of the citizen to bear military arms. "And indeed, gentlemen, there exists a law, not written down anywhere but inborn in our hearts; a law which comes to us not by training or custom or reading but by derivation and absorption and adoption from nature itself; a law which has come to us not from theory but from practice, not by instruction but by natural intuition. I refer to the law which lays it down that, if our lives are endangered by plots or violence or armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting ourselves is morally right."
11:19 Can confirm works. Sitting here doing a drawing listening to old beige, and this part made me look up to focus on the sudden quiet. Rhetorical psychology is neat.
If you still dont really grasp what rhetoric is, I'll put it in an extremely simple way. in This world, it is called "Rhetoric" In Skyrim, it is called "Speechcraft" ..... You're welcome.
Lloyd (if you'll pardon the familiarity), I suspect your solution IS how, or why, rhetoric vanished from the curriculum. It got parceled up across the board, and in losing focus blurred away to nothing.
My wife is a Language Arts teacher at a public school in the US. Her students are 17 years old. In addition to standard Language Arts which all students are required to take, she also teaches Speech and Cultural Literacy. Recognizing the importance of Rhetoric, every student she teaches gets taught about it.
not spend it all on sweets and comics.I wanted to study the effect of sugar on peoples reading comprehensions and whether action novels are easier to recall then their picture-less counterparts.
Roger, That was the control group! By the time the control group data had been collected there was no grant money left. If, however, the grant could be extended ...
Learning to make a rational argument is the whole point of expository writing assignments in Language Arts and Social Studies. Most children just write about their feelings, and their teachers let them get away with it.
CountArtha In 6th grade I almost made my teacher vomit with a very detailed account of the time I stepped on a screw and it had to be unscrewed out of the board it was in, I was very proud of myself at the time
I loved this one especially as I am enamoured by the creatura that rationality is. Your videos connect entertainment, in the form of your persona, with satisfaction of curiosity, in the form of the information you provide, in perfect proportions. Personally, the longer the video, the better. I am glad I found this channel!
Having been on the debate team in high school, I learned all about using techniques like rhetoric, issue framing, and even being made to argue-- and be expected to argue well enough to win --points/positions that we did not hold. My English teacher for junior and senior year was also the debate team coach. He revelled in making us argue points we not only didn't hold, but which we actually favored that position's antithesis. He once made me argue that Hitler's Final Solution was not only necessary, but ethical in a utilitarian moral framework as it supposedly did more good for more people than it harmed. He explained that he did this to illustrate how debate is rarely truly about find truth, but about changing minds and/or scoring points and how tactics like rhetorical devices can be dangerous. Personally, while I saw his point, what I took out of the exercise even more was that the moral philosophy of utilitarian is deeply flawed-- this is because I made a damned good case that murdering millions can be moral under utilitarian axioms. BTW, I went to a Jesuit college preparatory high school, which offered a more classical style education. Philosophy class taught rhetoric as well as debate team, as well as classical logic; and physics class spent a month teaching the basics of philosophy of science. I was a lucky young man, though I didn't realize it at the time :)
The US school system is handled by the local and state government. The federal government have a extremely small influence on schools. I learned rhetoric in high school. It was one of our core subjects. BTW I can time travel
the reasons you give for brining retoric back are the exact reasons they pulled it out to begin with. the ones in charge want a compliant and unaware citizenry.
it is yes. Usually pathos, appealing to your feelings (usualy curiosity) "you won't believe what this video is about!", "10 absolutely fantastical facts" etc. All challenge our sense of curiosity, on a level where we react almost automatically to.
Depends on what you're calling "clickbait" A lot of people on youtube confuse "catchy headline" with "clickbait". The fact that you were encouraged to click does not mean you were baited, it means it's a good headline. There's no "bait" unless there's a "switch" that comes after.
Perhaps all video titles and thumbnails are clickbait, because they are bait used to get you to click on a video. Most of it is bad, some of it straight-up misleading, and some of it is good. Funny thing is, no one complains when imagery and words that bait you to click on something are relevant and accurate. When people complain about "clickbait", they just mean that the bait was misleading or outright lies.
+Tymprasta I have seen many decent video getting over the normal of 1% of thumbs down just because for all I know there was a mismatch between content and title or thumbnail. (this video is at 1.2%)
The Dutch school system actually covers these false arguments like ad hominem, false dilemma's, incorrect comparison and circle argumentation pretty well teaching about them during language classes.
When I was on debate team one of my favorite rhetorical devices was the fallacious use of appeal to irrelevant consequences. I was just a teenager at the time, and I was literally taught to win the debate whether I believed the position I held or not. Now I've learned to despise that kind of dishonest tactic in discourse. The same sort of appeal to irrelevant consequences that I used that 17 and 18 in Debate Club is what young Earth creationists use to attack evolution when they say irrelevant things like "if evolution is true, then we're just animals and nothing matters and morals don't matter-- etc etc" in a debate about whether or not evolution best explain biodiversity given the evidence for, and predictive power of, the theory No matter how many desirable or undesirable consequences of a proposition being true there might be, these alleged consequences have nothing at all to do with whether the proposition is, in fact, true. The appeal the consequences is a type of appeal to emotion and a red herring fallacy, designed to distract from the issue at hand the evidence for or against the proposition and focus instead on alleged consequences of that proposition being true which the audience would find undesirable. This is done in the hope that they will react emotionally and reject the proposition because they want to avoid those undesirable consequences, rather then make a conclusion based on the actual evidence presented Such an argument is like saying the sun doesn't exist because it can give you skin cancer and one day it's going to expand so far that it's going to envelop the Earth and burn it to a crisp. None of that matters one Whit to whether or not the sun actually exists, which is a question simply looking up on a cloudless day should settle for most reasonable people
In Canada rhetoric is taught slightly through , “media literacy” which nowadays is a very broad subject focusing on avoiding misinformation, advertising, understanding the rise of certain leaders
@@LegendLength Logic is a part of rhetoric. They may neglect it, but even if they didn't they'd rely on rhetoric. Even scientific evidence is an appeal to logic and authority (scientific authority). You could call this empty rhetoric, or emotional rhetoric.
"Socrates - who he particularly missed..." Was that a sly Python reference, Lloyd? It's also worth noting that Socrates wasn't exactly executed, as i hear it. In Ancient Greece at the time, those who were condemned to death were quietly invited to self-exile. Socrates, though, wanted to prove a point (as he ever did), and *deliberately* stuck around and demanded to be executed. He was, but the government was very sheepish about the whole thing.
We live in a dark time with low grade language and ideas. Lindybeige is of the few that has reason and intelligence. I love this channel. Keep spreading your knowledge and wisdom!
Well, he's only mostly dead. If he were dead dead, the only thing left to do is go through his pockets for spare change. But mostly dead? We can do something about that!
For some time now I've been trying to work out why Lloyd reminds me of one of my most influential teachers during my time in sixth form college. At first I just thought it was a combination of the beard, fashion sense and accent - but now that I've seen this video I understand what it is. It's this. He taught 3 of the 4 subjects I was sitting, English language, English literature, and Critical Thinking. The latter was basically what Lloyd advocates for here as a single subject. It was a two year A-Level course that, honestly, could easily have been done in less than one in terms of material that needed to be covered but it was just so beneficial to my results in all three of the other subjects I studied (the fourth was psychology). It covered: persuasive writing techniques; logical fallacies; the structure of arguments, including how to constuct a logically sound argument; a little taster of formal logic; and how to dissect an argument. I've said ever since finishing my A-Levels that it shouldn't need to be left so late (to the point that only those with an eye toward going to university get the opportunity at all) when some of the simpler concepts could easily be instilled into a child's reasoning capabilities fairly early into their educational career and the more complex concepts could be pretty seemlessly into the fabric of the current curriculum across multiple subjects across multiple years and key stages.
I know this video is three years old, but still I feel I must comment. Fantastic video, and I very much agree that having some form of solid education in rhetoric, critical thinking, and statistics should be more pushed for in general education. In part due to my autism spectrum disorder, I used to have very black and white thinking, but taking a course in philosophy which covered these subjects disabused me of that kind of thought; a good bonus being that you can often empathise more with people on "the other side", so to speak. Also, Dr. Ben Goldacre's phenomenal book, "I Think You'll Find it is a Bit More Complicated Than That" was a very entertaining read which really helps you to better understand statistics, and also while showcasing a lot of the nonsense various people can come out with, and kneecapping their bad arguments and statistics.
I've always wondered about that song. That line seem to suggest that he feels left out, but earlier in the lyrics he is mentioned as being permanemtly pissed. So of all of them he alone gets mentioned twice and still he's unhappy. I guess there's no pleasing some philosophers... :/
Are you aware that pissed is UK slang for drunk? The song describes every philosopher as loving drink or drunk. It doesn't mean pissed as in pissed off or angry.
1:20 why is this no longer taught in school? 14:30 because, it's a mean of finding the truth. and if people found the truth, that'd be bad... very bad.
I know I’m a couple years late but I’ve had a fantastically entertaining and educational re-learning of rhetoric thanks to you. :) I agree that it should be taught in schools early on, at least so that young people would have a chance at expressing themselves more clearly and not getting distracted by “dismal drivel” as you put it. Rhetoric was by far my favorite topic in university, because it taught me more about, well, everything that has ever been spoken or communicated. Thank you for this video!
Call me a cynic, but the thought of my old school teaching us rhetoric is hilarious. They wanted quiet little robots who did as we were told. I'm sure the teachers saw us as a necessary yet inconvenient route to their wages. Except for Mr Senior, he was a good bloke.
I had to (temporarily) leave the video when he just dropped in the line “will be particularly missed” when referring to Plato. I had been very intensely and very seriously listening he uttered that line and then I burst into laughter. I had not been aware that he was a Monty Python fan. (Cf The Philosophers Song). What a trivial comment. Sorry! Well back to the video
Hello Mr. Beige, I'm an American college student and I remember dimly that we actually were briefly taught Ethos, Pathos, and Logos in a class my second year of high school called Interpersonal Communication, which mostly consisted of being taught how to do public speaking properly. I remember analyzing a few different professional persuasive essays and being asked to point out where these appeals were being made and whether or not they were logical arguments or not. I recall it being an interesting assignment but we only ever talked about it for a day or two. Likewise, the next year I took a composition class and we briefly talked about the various logical fallacies (like strawman, etc.), but again we only lightly touched upon it, and were never really asked to go deeper with these topics, we were just told to avoid the fallacies (which half the jaded gits in my class couldn't be bothered to do anyway). So I feel like an actual structured long course on the topic would be in order, to get more people thinking about what's actually being said to them (like how you mentioned people just ate up Obama's every word). So the idea has certainly been implemented, just not very well at all. And I went to an above-average (ha) school in a well-off neighborhood, so it wasn't for lack of funding or teachers that it wasn't taught, it's just not a very prominent thing that school administrators think we need.
I guess it's not typical, but the school I go to has a class that's suggested to every student to take before they graduate called "rhetoric and composition". He also mentioned that a lot of schools in the US don't require geography and history, so I guess my school is doubly odd since it requires both a world history class and an American history class to graduate.
Just held my last speech in an optional 'add-on' rhetoric-class. Just saw this and I think this video is a major reason I chose to take it. Definitely worth it! Thank you Lloyd!
Rhetoric really should be taught, it is essential for a good democracy. Brilliant video as always. The standards of debate everywhere has become about voting against something, driven by fear and hatred rather than something positive.
dnarbredlih Lots of schools around here only teach post colonial American history. It's kinda sad, being an American it's obviously important to know the history of your county but in my opinion there are much more interesting aspects of history you could be taught, which in lots of places are only offered as an elective, or someti.es not at all.
I Denmark we're taught about the pre-history of Denmark. Pre-colonial isn't even that so there's really no reason not to teach it, especially since the remains of the pre-colonial civilizations can still be found around the US just like how the remains of the stone and bronze age still dot the land scape of Denmark. It's infact a very important part of our national identity.
history and geography was wrapped up in a subject termed social studies, much in the same way that language arts combined english, writing composition, and grammar and to some degree logic.
British, Class of '11 here; Our public school had optional "clubs" for public speaking throughout primary and secondary school years. Something I regrettably passed up but was popular enough to run debates between all the participating schools in Hampshire, English exams did also contain a public speaking component. So take that for what you will.
meh fuck off with that, It's a tired argument to say freedom of speech is not valued because it isn't law. If it isn't it needs to be. You can not discuss ideas and values without it, you can not have a free society without it. It is the core to the modern western world's standard of life.
I think most people mis-understand the concept of free speech. It's not 'I can say what I want', it's 'I can criticise my government (within reason) with impunity'
@Not Sure nonsense. The right to keep and bear arms was *always* considered an individual right, as that is how the 2nd Amendment words it. "The People" always refers to... the people. There are 3 entities in the Constitution of note; the federal government, the States and the People. The right is NOT restricted to the context of a well-ordered militia, because if it were, it wouldn't be a militia, but an army. The militia is a coming together of The People *with their arms*. The 2nd is very clear that the right *of the People* to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, not the right of the State to have a militia. In their writings, the Founding Fathers were very clear in their support of the individual ownership of firearms. I find it further amusing that the U.S. has perhaps the most powerful army in the world when we are not to have a standing army at all. But we ignore that bit of the Constitution (just like we ignore the bit about POTUS having to be *natural*, not merely native, born). Further amusing still is the suggestion that "shall not be infringed" doesn't include concealed carry permits, licensing, or "gun-free zones". "Shall not be infringed" means that not even 7-11 can stop you from bringing your firearm, if you are allowed into the store without it. Unlike the 1st Amendment, the federal government is not specified. Don't like it? Doesn't matter; the proper way to change it is through the amendment process, not by ignoring it or pretending it means other than what it means.
Lloyd your videos are great. Thank you for them. My husband and I love your style/method/philosophy. Just wanted to comment that we second your opinion that rhetoric (or philosophy) be brought back into curriculum. My husband writes philosophy and social criticism and believes that a lack of this type of education has lead to a species wide communication problem. Psychology buried philosophy in the politic and the domain of morality became the focus of manipulation in practice. In the modern world, an inter-connected amalgam intellect that can't effectively communicate begins breaking down. He calls it Hypermanipulation.
Dear Mr Beige.... I have watched many of your videos and thoroughly enjoyed them but this particular episode delighted me. Your comments and common sense were accurate back in 2017 and are exactly what we need more of here in 2019!
Dear Mr Lloyd, I'm afraid the governments in Europe are not interested in responsible and mature citizens anymore. That might be one of the reasons why they don't teach rhetoric these days. They are interested in citizens who show a positive reaction to flyers like the Farage one. Of course I could just be a disillusioned German.
By what you say, seems as the three modes of persuasion could each correspond to which part of the exchange they attempt to bring focus on: -The *source* of the argument = ethos (be it "I'm a good source!" or "that guy's a bad source!") -The *recipient* of the argument = pathos (hoping you feel a certain way upon absorbing the argument, or that you keep absorbing the argument because you feel a certain way) -The *environment* = logos (independent, allegedly, to both source and recipient)
in spite of your regular advertisements, your sense of irony about them reaches a delightful peak in this episode :) And yes, his beige suit is fantastic...
I agree! But those capable of re-instituting the subject of rhetoric in schools, won't. Why? Because rhetoric is a powerful social weapon.. And as long as they have it in their arsenal, and the general public doesn't, social manipulation and subjugation meet with far less resistance. I happen to have been born with an innate knack for rhetoric.. In school I had teachers suggest that I may be a psychopath, because I rarely had much difficulty convincing people of...whatever I wanted to convince them of. Not only will they not teach it; they will decry anyone who is versed in it, as being "evil".
As for 'seemingly shoddy attempts at rhetoric'; imagine that two parties secretly agree on all points and, to lend persuasive strength to that which they truly agree on, one party is designated to poorly argue against that end. So you see two parties, arguing opposite sides of a point; one party effectively, one party ineffectively; but ultimately, the same party. Imposing the illusion of a divisive element.
Actually I'd say specifically the reason it wasn't re-instituted in schools, at least in the UK, is because education reform is a political landmine that most politicians avoid. Take a look at the recent educational reform attempts under Michael Gove in 2010-2014 if you want to see how much of a political disaster it can turn into. There's a reason he was "promoted" out of Secretary of State for education after trying to develop a new UK curriculum, although to be fair there were genuinely significant problems with his proposals.
I'm unfamiliar with those books. Forums for siblings? We don't need to delve into fiction to find examples of social manipulation.. It's all around us, here, in good-ole-fashioned reality.
EgaoKage you realise that politicians are people, right? Their kids go to the same schools your kids go to... so their kids aren't being taught it either...
Thank you sir. Your videos helped me a lot for the past several years. Finished my master study and proceeding with my doctorate...and I even got paid to do it. I find it fascinating that in high education these days people (especially the highly educated one) neglects the knowledge of logic, semantics and rhetorics. I got some examiners questioned whether my submitted research papers were plagiarized. To them the language structure was too sophisticated to what was usually submitted as drafts by junior postgraduates. Nothing feel so good than to submit a perfect document the first time and as final draft without any change whatsoever. Multiple draft submission of the same article done only for administrative reasons...you know how dull bureaucracy is...necessary but still...dull...
I'm five minutes into the presentation, Sir, and you already have me by the ..........you already have me more than willing to listen to all that you have to say.
pathos: please give me chocolate, i would like it as if you where my long gone uncle. he used to bring a box of chocolates just for me every time he visits. ethos: are you not gonna hand me a box of chocolate. last month a handed you three boxes of them and you should do the same. i mean its the right thing to do as a thank you to me for giving you such privilege of three hand wrapped boxes of chocolates. logos: a box of chocolate has 8 pieces in total that said buying for a person. it being 10 dollars for a box is not a good sign. it'll cost more and more if you bought it from some gift shop or some other well known places that sells chocolates. in a chocolate store 8 pieces is just at least 3 dollars a box. its not only freshly made, its tasty and a bit lesser priced than those shop chocolate cause it doesn't need a fancy expensive box just to be tasty/ teacher lindybeige, did i get my answer's right? if not do assign me some more studies. I passed out right in the middle of your lecture.
pathos: i thank you for such a bar of chocolate. it would be rude if i didn't take it. i thank you once again. ethos: don't mind if i take the chocolate away from your hands. i did ask didn't i not and so you gave me that box of chocolates there for i am obligated to take it and you are there to give it and stop the urge of taking the box back. logos: yes chocolate.... where is the box of chocolate you are desired to give to me? yes this is the internet after all, you can only lie to give a box so in return i too shall lie about that mystical chocolate box that you intended to give. now let me ask you again, is the cake a lie or is that box of chocolate's, an even bigger lie.
In the US, we have AP courses, one of which is AP Language and Composition, which heavily focuses on rhetoric. A proper understanding of argumentative and persuasive writing, and of rhetorical devices, is extremely useful.
By the way. I thoroughly agree with your manifesto for teaching more rhetoric. I'm a member of a debating club in London with that very mission, (albeit currently outside of the school system). We'd love to have you along some time.
33 minutes of Lloyd talking about rhetoric? What could possibly be more fun?!
The Blagger Of Lebanon nothing comes to mind, wait is that a rhetoric question?
Preciselyrandom I... I think.
Lindy talking for 2 hours about the Roman military-political system?
The Blagger Of Lebanon 34 minutes of Lloyd talking about rhetoric :D
Daniel Cannata Dammit!
Lloyd, Mr. Beige, You know by now that you could make a 2 hour video on ancient Mesopotamian basket weaving and I would watch it at least twice.
I genuinely want to see this.
Only if it's UNDERWATER basket-weaving. I hear that's what separates the real weavers from the amateurs and gets you a degree.
Couples basket weaving might be nice. That is a video of Lloyd and Mrs. Beige doing Mesopotamian basket weaving together...not Lloyd weaving baskets made of couples.
Toratchi888 Yeah I took that at camp and I got the merit badge I didn't take that at school so I can't get the degree. 😢
Only slightly off-topic but look up a channel called Primitive Technology. You will never spend so much time watching a guy in shorts alone in the woods not say anything and be enthralled the whole time.
Ethos, Pathos, Logos and d'Artagnan.
One for all and all for one bitches.
I very nearly did that gag. I wish I had, now.
AND I'M JAVERT!
That is Fucking Hilarious!
I really think it better that you didn't do that "joke", since it makes the whole subject rather silly.
This man is a great teacher. Regardless of conscious manipulation (rhetoric) or simple natural talent.
Certainly he's an engaging, amusing speaker, even if one wonders about the occasional interpretation.
17:30 "and the rich guy gives an amazing speech written for him by a professional speech giver who used to be a lawyer" I'm in tears. Such a classic
Me: I should stuy for my english oral exam!
*this video pops up*
Me: Well, he's a brit, that should do it
and you actually learned some Rhetorics which are useful in your exam
so how did your exam go? :)
Me: I'm only watching this if it's sponsored by The Great Courses Plus.
"...this video which has been sponsored by The Great Courses Plus."
Gets popcorn
... You honestly choose not to watch videos if they are not sponsored?
This is the very first time I read something remotely like this, be it serious or in jest.
Have a lovely day!
surely he jests
how bout Audible?
My chemistry teacher did the silence thing all the time when we were in our teenage years - and accordingly annoying, especially paired with chemicals and Bunsenburners - and it worked better than every other method teachers tried. I am convinced that it has made an impression on all of us.
if you did that in my multicultural high school kids would jsut continue to talk over you.
I've been in favour for a long time of teaching children in schools to interpret statistics properly and to dismantle bad arguments and reason logically (and most importantly recognise fallacious arguments). Mostly for the political reasons. Because you can't have a healthy democracy where the people elected actually represent people's best interests if people are not sufficiently educated to figure out what those interests are or who's representing them. And if the politicians aren't incentivised to defend themselves through logic, but instead to vaccuous arguments and platitudes. Because that's part of the problem. They work so politicians use them. Let's put a bigger focus on this in education and make them not work anymore. Only then will they stop using them and only then does democracy have a chance of rising above people's worst instincts and actually working towards the good of all.
I know more about my political oppositional parties' ideology (and it isn't an exhaustive amount) than my friends that support them. Nobody even puts in the time to read their own manifesti, they literally can't even be bothered to huff their own farts let alone anothers'.
Isn't it proven by some (3 or 4) public educated generations that one can't achieve medium standards needed to discern very bad rhetorics? Who's in charge? - Stupid. Don't know, are you allowed to say this in free speech Britain.
my high school required you to take rhetoric and latin. it was a charter school in colorado. i wish i could have stayed there.
Postmodernism is the biggest enemy of reason. The notion that there's no such thing as objective truth wipes out the possibility for truth, and the companion notion that all truth is subjective is too often in practice turned around into the notion that all my subjective feelings and inclinations are general truths.
-- Humans may not be able to create absolute truths, but however imperfect our truths are, some are better, in a practical sense, than others, because they work better in describing realities more or less accurately, in ways that are useful for other people.
-- Imagine a world without truth. This is the world of postmodernists, and for postmodernists, the only function of dialogue is to manipulate other people. What else is left, if there's no truth to pursue, refine, or communicate?
-- Feminist theory, critical race theory, queer theory, and recent Marxist theory are heavily influenced by postmodernism, and it should come as no surprise that the "research" that spews forth from them is rarely true or valuable.
Perhaps make it compulsory for all secondary school kids to read "How to lie with statistics", though perhaps it could have more modern examples. Most people have no idea about variability in populations. When they leave school they forget about standard deviation and variance, and all those little things that tell you how reliable the figures are that people (e.g. politicians) throw at you.
Can we just appreciate Lindy does these videos in one take?
How do you know it was one take? We may have been watching take 7...
@@fransmars1645 yeah whatever, but even if, it's still a 33 minute video. Even if it was his 7th take, it might be even more impressive what kind of effort he puts into making these. Not to mention that he said somewhere that he doesn't do multiple takes, I think at least
I'm a software engineeer. I spend most of my day writing code. Still; rhetoric is possibly the best course I've ever taken. I had no idea it was such an amazing subject before I started. I think it should be required in high school. I took "speech" instead because it's what my school required. It's night-and-day different from a proper schooling in rhetoric. I think requiring rhetoric lessons would go a long way towards making Internet discourse a better experience.
I've been pushing the fine folks at Crash Course to do CC Rhetoric for the past year now. It might just happen.
verdatum Engineering is, after all, about 10% coming up with good solutions and 90% persuading people you've come up with good solutions...
In essence, I agree. But nah, on the lower rungs, it's more like 70/30 solutions-to-convincing. It's not until your superiors are not themselves engineers that you really need to weave a story. Of course, there are exceptions, usually involving your superiors being really crummy engineers.
But rhetoric absolutely is a huge help in securing that job in the first place. And that is indeed a critical skill in the realm. Being good in interviews is a valuable skill that lots of software people aren't so hot at. And in helping with interviews myself, a lot of it involves reminding yourself how bad many very talented software people can be in interviews. If it turns out they write good readable code, then I'm happy. Being able to explain why their code is good is just icing on the cake.
Very interesting! I'm actually learning something! Your discourse is not only long but also informative. I'm almost capable of getting past the incessant blabbering. Thank you!
I'm also a software engineer. However, in my case my bosses typically know the area better than I do, in which case all my employer is interested in is me just doing as I'm told. However, when I was freelancing and in job interviews etc, the power of speech is vital! It is very helpful indeed.
Never forget you're doing informatics. It's all about knowing what you're doing, and knowledge is formed by language,. Rethorics is one approach to this, but there are more, just as valuable.
Lloyd with your elegant voice and debonair demeanor, you'd make a great teacher of rhetoric for the Great Courses Plus.
*(That was flattery btw- it's an appeal to an emotion)*
I may be imagining things, but isn't It an amzing coincidence that as soon as education started being open to the lower clases rethoric disapeared from school curriculums.
Is that a rhetorical question?
@@showmemoviesnow They don't WANT to, and may eat you if you prod them towards the light. Never underestimate the vicious stupidity of the common man.
showmemoviesnow of course
What an incredibly classist statement on your part. A serious reason for why the UK is no longer an empire but more like a failing bank. Where they have lots of upper crust types behaving dishonestly, but at least they have the proper accent, right?
[citation needed] aka: ¿Where did you get that information from?
As an american I had a teacher that taught almost exclusively rhetoric in my high school English class. It isn't the standard here for that to happen but I specifically remember how much fun the class actually was because of it. We'd go through controversial speeches and articles and every sentence someone would shout out a rhetorical device used, and then we would apply the concepts learned to a class debate about the topic. Breaking down weak arguments and discovering ways of using rhetoric to further our own was incredibly useful and enjoyable, and I still use what I learned from that one class today. Great vid as always Lindy!
11:05
Holy shit, when you went quiet you got my attention opposed to your shouting before it... Thats crazy. Next time I am presenting something I'll be sure to use that trick.
A magician taught Hitler the same technique, it's easiest to notice in his first speech to a rabid Nazi audience right after he was elected Chancellor. It's eerie how well it works.
gets me no matter how many times i've seen this. i'm already anticipating the point but i have to look up to see if my phone froze or something. just to see lindy cradling patiently.
sly bugger.
We, here in Greece, are taught the most basic of rhetoric in school, so as to right the most convincing essay. Sometimes there are task where we have to actually come up with false, yet seeming like true, arguements. Σοφίσματα
*write
sh4ggie I know we also did the same in Massachusetts. Though our school system is very decentralized so it differs from district to district.
Sophismata, does that mean wise, smart?
I study old greek
@Opperturk
It can be translated as "forgery puzzle" . Sophismata is an argument entailing falsehood for educational purposes.
Not sure, but I think the etymons (a.k.a etyms) of the word itself can be distinguished as follows : _sophos_ (wisedom) + _-ma_ (suffix for the outcome of an action or process) + _-ta_ (suffix for an intervening agent either personal or not). So, semantically speaking, we can say _sophismata_ it's a "sophism agent" or more precisely "a device or construct that entails a sophism" (here 'sophism' doesn't have its original meaning of, let's say, "axiom of wisdom" but the derogatory meaning of "falsehood" or "forgery" because of historical reasons)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophismata
my regards 🇦🇷
Just like marxists
I don't get it. Why do we love watching Lindy so much?
I'm convinced he could make any topic interesting.
Razar Campbell enthusiastic, knowledgeable, insightful, try a to be honest, not arrogant, doesn't come across as understanding it, very relatable, humour without trying too hard. A Fantastic watch
He's a lovely guy
His use of rhetorics is on point.
Rhetoric.
That, in a nutshell, is also rethoric.
this channel has mountains of character, such an (at first) seemingly low-quality format works so well and is incredibly entertaining to watch
After Cicero spoke, the people remarked how well he spoke, when Demosthenes spoke, the people said "Let us march".
The only people really swayed by that ignoramus, Cicero were his financial backers of his own Patrician class
@@evannesbitt7852 silence pleb
@@narakagati5872 *jazz music stops*
@@narakagati5872 fuk u
Death to tyrants! Long live the Republic! Ave Cicero!
My first introduction to Cicero was his spirited defense of the right of the citizen to bear military arms. "And indeed, gentlemen, there exists a law, not written down anywhere but inborn in our hearts; a law which comes to us not by training or custom or reading but by derivation and absorption and adoption from nature itself; a law which has come to us not from theory but from practice, not by instruction but by natural intuition. I refer to the law which lays it down that, if our lives are endangered by plots or violence or armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting ourselves is morally right."
11:19 Can confirm works. Sitting here doing a drawing listening to old beige, and this part made me look up to focus on the sudden quiet. Rhetorical psychology is neat.
If you still dont really grasp what rhetoric is, I'll put it in an extremely simple way.
in This world, it is called "Rhetoric"
In Skyrim, it is called "Speechcraft"
.....
You're welcome.
and In D&D is a mixture of Persusasion and deception (depending on your goals and tactics) :P
Daniel Cannata I've heard of you and your honeyed words
Citizen, you have my ear.
And for my final argument: Fus Roh Dah!
In other words, words have meaning. Therefore words have power...
Lindy using rhetoric on me?
*purrs*
Synystr7 XD
Lloyd (if you'll pardon the familiarity), I suspect your solution IS how, or why, rhetoric vanished from the curriculum. It got parceled up across the board, and in losing focus blurred away to nothing.
It seems so.
If you have learned how to write an essay, then you have probably covered most of rhetoric.
My wife is a Language Arts teacher at a public school in the US. Her students are 17 years old.
In addition to standard Language Arts which all students are required to take, she also teaches Speech and Cultural Literacy. Recognizing the importance of Rhetoric, every student she teaches gets taught about it.
This man is a national treasure. A plain speaking, honestly held and elegant presentation of the facts. Thank you and very well done.
not spend it all on sweets and comics.I wanted to study the effect of sugar on peoples reading comprehensions and whether action novels are easier to recall then their picture-less counterparts.
Then why did you spend all your grant money on hookers and blow?
Roger, That was the control group! By the time the control group data had been collected there was no grant money left. If, however, the grant could be extended ...
Logos?
Learning to make a rational argument is the whole point of expository writing assignments in Language Arts and Social Studies. Most children just write about their feelings, and their teachers let them get away with it.
CountArtha In 6th grade I almost made my teacher vomit with a very detailed account of the time I stepped on a screw and it had to be unscrewed out of the board it was in, I was very proud of myself at the time
Nice to see you recreated the room in the tank museum, it looks identical.
I loved this one especially as I am enamoured by the creatura that rationality is. Your videos connect entertainment, in the form of your persona, with satisfaction of curiosity, in the form of the information you provide, in perfect proportions. Personally, the longer the video, the better. I am glad I found this channel!
Having been on the debate team in high school, I learned all about using techniques like rhetoric, issue framing, and even being made to argue-- and be expected to argue well enough to win --points/positions that we did not hold.
My English teacher for junior and senior year was also the debate team coach. He revelled in making us argue points we not only didn't hold, but which we actually favored that position's antithesis. He once made me argue that Hitler's Final Solution was not only necessary, but ethical in a utilitarian moral framework as it supposedly did more good for more people than it harmed.
He explained that he did this to illustrate how debate is rarely truly about find truth, but about changing minds and/or scoring points and how tactics like rhetorical devices can be dangerous.
Personally, while I saw his point, what I took out of the exercise even more was that the moral philosophy of utilitarian is deeply flawed-- this is because I made a damned good case that murdering millions can be moral under utilitarian axioms.
BTW, I went to a Jesuit college preparatory high school, which offered a more classical style education. Philosophy class taught rhetoric as well as debate team, as well as classical logic; and physics class spent a month teaching the basics of philosophy of science.
I was a lucky young man, though I didn't realize it at the time :)
The US school system is handled by the local and state government. The federal government have a extremely small influence on schools. I learned rhetoric in high school. It was one of our core subjects.
BTW I can time travel
Cicero! I'm a big fan!
no, you are a hat Mr. Francis :I
Provinces handle education in canada. ANd in my province it is standard to teacj geography and history
Marcus Tullius Cicero since common core not ss much
Marcus Tullius Cicero when did you go to high school?
The term "ancient greek pick-up artists" is somehow stuck in my mind.
the reasons you give for brining retoric back are the exact reasons they pulled it out to begin with. the ones in charge want a compliant and unaware citizenry.
Pay attention or continue to pay out the nose...
Exactly. The “drivel” works because they aren’t teaching rhetoric. So why would they make it harder for themselves?
Conspiracies don't get anyone anywhere
@@bowmanc.7439 The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly.
nearly up to 1 million subs. I love this perpetual hand-signing cardigan man.
Having studies rhetoric for three years, I must say I really like this entire video and it's message. Well done, Sir! :o)
Is clickbait Rhetoric?
it is yes. Usually pathos, appealing to your feelings (usualy curiosity) "you won't believe what this video is about!", "10 absolutely fantastical facts" etc. All challenge our sense of curiosity, on a level where we react almost automatically to.
Depends on what you're calling "clickbait" A lot of people on youtube confuse "catchy headline" with "clickbait". The fact that you were encouraged to click does not mean you were baited, it means it's a good headline.
There's no "bait" unless there's a "switch" that comes after.
Also lust is very popular pathos! Boobs and butts alike!
Perhaps all video titles and thumbnails are clickbait, because they are bait used to get you to click on a video. Most of it is bad, some of it straight-up misleading, and some of it is good. Funny thing is, no one complains when imagery and words that bait you to click on something are relevant and accurate. When people complain about "clickbait", they just mean that the bait was misleading or outright lies.
+Tymprasta I have seen many decent video getting over the normal of 1% of thumbs down just because for all I know there was a mismatch between content and title or thumbnail. (this video is at 1.2%)
"Socrates, who was particularly missed."
Congratulations Lindy, you just earned Like :)
That caught me too! It was a really sneaky Monty Python reference.
Scrolled through to find this comment. Great work!
A lovely little thinker but a bugger when he's pissed!
Right, from now every time I try to describe Lord of the Rings to friends I'm gonna say "Hobbit chaps."
Well, that's my tutor group activities sorted for the next academic year. Cheers!
"Even a plumber needs rhetoric" ~13:00 Bravo sir.
How is this video longer than the Panzer III video?!
Quick inform the Tank Museum that their Lindybeige has gotten loose!
Haha, first comment in a long time that actually made me laugh.
The Dutch school system actually covers these false arguments like ad hominem, false dilemma's, incorrect comparison and circle argumentation pretty well teaching about them during language classes.
ahah ja he toen hij dat zei kon ik me herinner dat wij juist wel lessen kregen over drogredenen, maar misschien is dit niet op alle niveau's
hazzmati krijg t in ieder geval zowel op havo als op vwo
Canada couldn't do that, it would raise a generation of children who see through the bullshit of our politics.
Going on a one week exchange in a Dutch highschool was as enlightening as it was depressing to go back to mine afterwards. :(
Yet in an interview with random street people 90% of them thought britain leaving the EU was insane and bad and we must stay in lol...
Having just watched this, it has been added to my list of materials for future education of my inevitable progeny. Thank you.
When I was on debate team one of my favorite rhetorical devices was the fallacious use of appeal to irrelevant consequences. I was just a teenager at the time, and I was literally taught to win the debate whether I believed the position I held or not. Now I've learned to despise that kind of dishonest tactic in discourse.
The same sort of appeal to irrelevant consequences that I used that 17 and 18 in Debate Club is what young Earth creationists use to attack evolution when they say irrelevant things like "if evolution is true, then we're just animals and nothing matters and morals don't matter-- etc etc" in a debate about whether or not evolution best explain biodiversity given the evidence for, and predictive power of, the theory
No matter how many desirable or undesirable consequences of a proposition being true there might be, these alleged consequences have nothing at all to do with whether the proposition is, in fact, true.
The appeal the consequences is a type of appeal to emotion and a red herring fallacy, designed to distract from the issue at hand the evidence for or against the proposition and focus instead on alleged consequences of that proposition being true which the audience would find undesirable.
This is done in the hope that they will react emotionally and reject the proposition because they want to avoid those undesirable consequences, rather then make a conclusion based on the actual evidence presented
Such an argument is like saying the sun doesn't exist because it can give you skin cancer and one day it's going to expand so far that it's going to envelop the Earth and burn it to a crisp. None of that matters one Whit to whether or not the sun actually exists, which is a question simply looking up on a cloudless day should settle for most reasonable people
In Canada rhetoric is taught slightly through , “media literacy” which nowadays is a very broad subject focusing on avoiding misinformation, advertising, understanding the rise of certain leaders
@@LegendLength Logic is a part of rhetoric. They may neglect it, but even if they didn't they'd rely on rhetoric.
Even scientific evidence is an appeal to logic and authority (scientific authority).
You could call this empty rhetoric, or emotional rhetoric.
"Socrates - who he particularly missed..." Was that a sly Python reference, Lloyd?
It's also worth noting that Socrates wasn't exactly executed, as i hear it. In Ancient Greece at the time, those who were condemned to death were quietly invited to self-exile. Socrates, though, wanted to prove a point (as he ever did), and *deliberately* stuck around and demanded to be executed. He was, but the government was very sheepish about the whole thing.
I thought Socrates was forced to drink poison? He was not beheaded as suggested in the video, I think.
I heard he was burned alive... not that I ever heard a word about him in any academic environment.
Dosbomber No, he was made to drink hemlock. its very famous.
Grymbaldknight Socrates: himself was particularly pissed.
We live in a dark time with low grade language and ideas. Lindybeige is of the few that has reason and intelligence. I love this channel. Keep spreading your knowledge and wisdom!
"Kill him to death!" Lindybeige 2017 AHAHAHA lol
To make sure they didn't kill him to life
Reddy23 it's bad translation from an anime from years and years ago..
Well, he's only mostly dead. If he were dead dead, the only thing left to do is go through his pockets for spare change. But mostly dead? We can do something about that!
For some time now I've been trying to work out why Lloyd reminds me of one of my most influential teachers during my time in sixth form college. At first I just thought it was a combination of the beard, fashion sense and accent - but now that I've seen this video I understand what it is. It's this. He taught 3 of the 4 subjects I was sitting, English language, English literature, and Critical Thinking. The latter was basically what Lloyd advocates for here as a single subject. It was a two year A-Level course that, honestly, could easily have been done in less than one in terms of material that needed to be covered but it was just so beneficial to my results in all three of the other subjects I studied (the fourth was psychology). It covered: persuasive writing techniques; logical fallacies; the structure of arguments, including how to constuct a logically sound argument; a little taster of formal logic; and how to dissect an argument. I've said ever since finishing my A-Levels that it shouldn't need to be left so late (to the point that only those with an eye toward going to university get the opportunity at all) when some of the simpler concepts could easily be instilled into a child's reasoning capabilities fairly early into their educational career and the more complex concepts could be pretty seemlessly into the fabric of the current curriculum across multiple subjects across multiple years and key stages.
I know this video is three years old, but still I feel I must comment. Fantastic video, and I very much agree that having some form of solid education in rhetoric, critical thinking, and statistics should be more pushed for in general education. In part due to my autism spectrum disorder, I used to have very black and white thinking, but taking a course in philosophy which covered these subjects disabused me of that kind of thought; a good bonus being that you can often empathise more with people on "the other side", so to speak. Also, Dr. Ben Goldacre's phenomenal book, "I Think You'll Find it is a Bit More Complicated Than That" was a very entertaining read which really helps you to better understand statistics, and also while showcasing a lot of the nonsense various people can come out with, and kneecapping their bad arguments and statistics.
Loyd for Consul!
Haha I was looking away from my screen when he went quiet and it really brought me back into the video
Someone should upload all Lindybeige videos on RedTube! XDD
"Tall british guy showing his sword skills"
GermanCurl tall British guy in sweater seduces girl using his rhetoric
take my damn upvote
Tall British guy talking dirty: "penetrate the frenchmen with arrows from your LONG bow"
Who the hell in their right mind would use RedTube?!?! Xvideos or Pornhub is the way...
Am I the only one who thought that said RUclips Red?
20:44 "cannot pass military secrets to the french" hahaha i laught for 2 hours
the reason I like your digressions so much is you always somehow come back to your original point, you never lose your train of thought.
Socrates himself is particularly missed!
A great little thinker, but...
😄
...a bugger when he's pissed!
I've always wondered about that song. That line seem to suggest that he feels left out, but earlier in the lyrics he is mentioned as being permanemtly pissed. So of all of them he alone gets mentioned twice and still he's unhappy.
I guess there's no pleasing some philosophers... :/
Are you aware that pissed is UK slang for drunk? The song describes every philosopher as loving drink or drunk. It doesn't mean pissed as in pissed off or angry.
I commented on an earlier video asking for more tanks and you supplied us with glorious Bovington, Will there be more oh Lindy?
There shall!
1:20
why is this no longer taught in school?
14:30
because, it's a mean of finding the truth.
and if people found the truth, that'd be bad... very bad.
I know I’m a couple years late but I’ve had a fantastically entertaining and educational re-learning of rhetoric thanks to you. :) I agree that it should be taught in schools early on, at least so that young people would have a chance at expressing themselves more clearly and not getting distracted by “dismal drivel” as you put it. Rhetoric was by far my favorite topic in university, because it taught me more about, well, everything that has ever been spoken or communicated. Thank you for this video!
when u slowed down i got that same feeling as when i watched Darren Browns shows, absolutely nailed it!
Don't get reason and emotion mixed up. That would be pathological.
"Deadly argument" xD
Catch_Me_If_You_Can, you love your child because it carries your genes. Not one for logic, I presume.
Good day Lindy.
Call me a cynic, but the thought of my old school teaching us rhetoric is hilarious. They wanted quiet little robots who did as we were told. I'm sure the teachers saw us as a necessary yet inconvenient route to their wages. Except for Mr Senior, he was a good bloke.
I had to (temporarily) leave the video when he just dropped in the line “will be particularly missed” when referring to Plato. I had been very intensely and very seriously
listening he uttered that line and then I burst into laughter. I had not been aware that he was a Monty Python fan. (Cf The Philosophers Song). What a trivial comment. Sorry! Well back to the video
Hello Mr. Beige, I'm an American college student and I remember dimly that we actually were briefly taught Ethos, Pathos, and Logos in a class my second year of high school called Interpersonal Communication, which mostly consisted of being taught how to do public speaking properly. I remember analyzing a few different professional persuasive essays and being asked to point out where these appeals were being made and whether or not they were logical arguments or not. I recall it being an interesting assignment but we only ever talked about it for a day or two. Likewise, the next year I took a composition class and we briefly talked about the various logical fallacies (like strawman, etc.), but again we only lightly touched upon it, and were never really asked to go deeper with these topics, we were just told to avoid the fallacies (which half the jaded gits in my class couldn't be bothered to do anyway). So I feel like an actual structured long course on the topic would be in order, to get more people thinking about what's actually being said to them (like how you mentioned people just ate up Obama's every word). So the idea has certainly been implemented, just not very well at all. And I went to an above-average (ha) school in a well-off neighborhood, so it wasn't for lack of funding or teachers that it wasn't taught, it's just not a very prominent thing that school administrators think we need.
just so you know, Canadians most definitely have both geography and history classes
He is right about the Americans tho, don't know why he shitted on the Canadians ?
I had both throughout my early education and extended education so...
We also have debates (rhetoric) in English class
American here, geography was sophmore year, history was throughout it all, and rhetoric was junior year
Anarchy-Senpai Why do you americans give strange names to everything?
I bet Cicero could morph Lindy into a katana fanboy in no time. But he would leave the house with a tank model in his hands.
xD
If only this video went up before the aqa english language exam....
Your ad-hoc, unplanned and sometimes scatterbrained style is very entertaining to watch, don't change a bit about it. :)
i just came back to this video after learning rhetorical fallacies and i can't say how much I appreciate you Lindy!
I love the thought of scientists, once their funding grant has come through, rushing out to buy sweets and comics :D haa haa
a/k/a hookers and blow
I guess it's not typical, but the school I go to has a class that's suggested to every student to take before they graduate called "rhetoric and composition". He also mentioned that a lot of schools in the US don't require geography and history, so I guess my school is doubly odd since it requires both a world history class and an American history class to graduate.
As a non-American with some awareness of American schools, I view them as teaching a ridiculous amount of "history".
3:17 Ethos, Pathos and Logos - otherwise known as the Three Greek Musketeers.
Just held my last speech in an optional 'add-on' rhetoric-class. Just saw this and I think this video is a major reason I chose to take it. Definitely worth it! Thank you Lloyd!
Rhetoric really should be taught, it is essential for a good democracy. Brilliant video as always. The standards of debate everywhere has become about voting against something, driven by fear and hatred rather than something positive.
I've never heard of a high school in the US without geography and history in my whole life living here.
Glad to read this, but I spoken with other North Americans who were not so blessed.
dnarbredlih Lots of schools around here only teach post colonial American history. It's kinda sad, being an American it's obviously important to know the history of your county but in my opinion there are much more interesting aspects of history you could be taught, which in lots of places are only offered as an elective, or someti.es not at all.
Possibly it varies by state. By the sounds of things a lot of things do.
I Denmark we're taught about the pre-history of Denmark. Pre-colonial isn't even that so there's really no reason not to teach it, especially since the remains of the pre-colonial civilizations can still be found around the US just like how the remains of the stone and bronze age still dot the land scape of Denmark. It's infact a very important part of our national identity.
history and geography was wrapped up in a subject termed social studies, much in the same way that language arts combined english, writing composition, and grammar and to some degree logic.
Cicero got “killed to death” 😂
Why do you have a pair of spectacles fixed to the wall behind you, just wondered?
Just in case
British, Class of '11 here; Our public school had optional "clubs" for public speaking throughout primary and secondary school years. Something I regrettably passed up but was popular enough to run debates between all the participating schools in Hampshire, English exams did also contain a public speaking component. So take that for what you will.
I wish I had more teachers like you when I was younger. Even the kids with the attention span of a squirrel would learn something. Thumbs up.
Hitlers salute.
Churchills V sign.
Scissors beats paper.
yeah if Stalin wasn't rock then Hitler wouldn't been a better quality paper.
Actually I would argue that Saddam Hussein was the rock, because that way when we invaded Iran we were stuck between Iraq and a hard place.
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart \\//_ live long and prosper
that's why hydra will win.
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart As it turned out, Jews beat both :^)
A very good rhetoric technique I mastered to convince people doing something is something like this: "What? Are you a chicken?"
Dzień dobry.
Or....would you rather set the table or clean your filthy room? Room happily never gets picked.
I think Count Dankula would disagree that Britons have freedom of speech.
What of Lord Buckethead?
meh fuck off with that, It's a tired argument to say freedom of speech is not valued because it isn't law. If it isn't it needs to be. You can not discuss ideas and values without it, you can not have a free society without it. It is the core to the modern western world's standard of life.
I think most people mis-understand the concept of free speech. It's not 'I can say what I want', it's 'I can criticise my government (within reason) with impunity'
Youchubeswindon What? Are you some sort of Maoist? You're the one with the misunderstanding.
@Not Sure nonsense. The right to keep and bear arms was *always* considered an individual right, as that is how the 2nd Amendment words it. "The People" always refers to... the people. There are 3 entities in the Constitution of note; the federal government, the States and the People. The right is NOT restricted to the context of a well-ordered militia, because if it were, it wouldn't be a militia, but an army. The militia is a coming together of The People *with their arms*. The 2nd is very clear that the right *of the People* to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, not the right of the State to have a militia. In their writings, the Founding Fathers were very clear in their support of the individual ownership of firearms.
I find it further amusing that the U.S. has perhaps the most powerful army in the world when we are not to have a standing army at all. But we ignore that bit of the Constitution (just like we ignore the bit about POTUS having to be *natural*, not merely native, born).
Further amusing still is the suggestion that "shall not be infringed" doesn't include concealed carry permits, licensing, or "gun-free zones". "Shall not be infringed" means that not even 7-11 can stop you from bringing your firearm, if you are allowed into the store without it. Unlike the 1st Amendment, the federal government is not specified.
Don't like it? Doesn't matter; the proper way to change it is through the amendment process, not by ignoring it or pretending it means other than what it means.
Lloyd your videos are great. Thank you for them. My husband and I love your style/method/philosophy. Just wanted to comment that we second your opinion that rhetoric (or philosophy) be brought back into curriculum. My husband writes philosophy and social criticism and believes that a lack of this type of education has lead to a species wide communication problem. Psychology buried philosophy in the politic and the domain of morality became the focus of manipulation in practice. In the modern world, an inter-connected amalgam intellect that can't effectively communicate begins breaking down. He calls it Hypermanipulation.
Dear Mr Beige.... I have watched many of your videos and thoroughly enjoyed them but this particular episode delighted me. Your comments and common sense were accurate back in 2017 and are exactly what we need more of here in 2019!
Dear Mr Lloyd, I'm afraid the governments in Europe are not interested in responsible and mature citizens anymore. That might be one of the reasons why they don't teach rhetoric these days. They are interested in citizens who show a positive reaction to flyers like the Farage one. Of course I could just be a disillusioned German.
C. Schalk
In Sweden we get a fair bit of rhetoric
i think Germany should concentrate to create... you know... a powerful argument
20:35 police in 2019 “that’s where your wrong kiddo hurting feelings is a arrest abele offence”
Yeah, some prophets are fair game and some aren't.
You make many excellent points
By what you say, seems as the three modes of persuasion could each correspond to which part of the exchange they attempt to bring focus on:
-The *source* of the argument = ethos (be it "I'm a good source!" or "that guy's a bad source!")
-The *recipient* of the argument = pathos (hoping you feel a certain way upon absorbing the argument, or that you keep absorbing the argument because you feel a certain way)
-The *environment* = logos (independent, allegedly, to both source and recipient)
in spite of your regular advertisements, your sense of irony about them reaches a delightful peak in this episode :) And yes, his beige suit is fantastic...
I agree! But those capable of re-instituting the subject of rhetoric in schools, won't. Why? Because rhetoric is a powerful social weapon.. And as long as they have it in their arsenal, and the general public doesn't, social manipulation and subjugation meet with far less resistance. I happen to have been born with an innate knack for rhetoric.. In school I had teachers suggest that I may be a psychopath, because I rarely had much difficulty convincing people of...whatever I wanted to convince them of. Not only will they not teach it; they will decry anyone who is versed in it, as being "evil".
As for 'seemingly shoddy attempts at rhetoric'; imagine that two parties secretly agree on all points and, to lend persuasive strength to that which they truly agree on, one party is designated to poorly argue against that end. So you see two parties, arguing opposite sides of a point; one party effectively, one party ineffectively; but ultimately, the same party. Imposing the illusion of a divisive element.
...this sounds quite like the idea behind the forum personas that Ender's siblings concocted in Ender's Game.
Actually I'd say specifically the reason it wasn't re-instituted in schools, at least in the UK, is because education reform is a political landmine that most politicians avoid. Take a look at the recent educational reform attempts under Michael Gove in 2010-2014 if you want to see how much of a political disaster it can turn into. There's a reason he was "promoted" out of Secretary of State for education after trying to develop a new UK curriculum, although to be fair there were genuinely significant problems with his proposals.
I'm unfamiliar with those books. Forums for siblings? We don't need to delve into fiction to find examples of social manipulation.. It's all around us, here, in good-ole-fashioned reality.
EgaoKage you realise that politicians are people, right? Their kids go to the same schools your kids go to... so their kids aren't being taught it either...
The speed of lindys hair dissapearing is really disturbing.
Brzina kojom Lindijeva kosa nestaje je uznemirujuca.
+VR P pa dobro
+Nikola Nedeljkovic well good
+VR P Im not going to win this one , am i ?
+Nikola Nedeljkovic da neces
"i am british which means that i enjoy a certain amount of freedom of speech" well that aged quickly
It wasn't even true back then when he said it.
Thank you sir. Your videos helped me a lot for the past several years. Finished my master study and proceeding with my doctorate...and I even got paid to do it. I find it fascinating that in high education these days people (especially the highly educated one) neglects the knowledge of logic, semantics and rhetorics. I got some examiners questioned whether my submitted research papers were plagiarized. To them the language structure was too sophisticated to what was usually submitted as drafts by junior postgraduates. Nothing feel so good than to submit a perfect document the first time and as final draft without any change whatsoever. Multiple draft submission of the same article done only for administrative reasons...you know how dull bureaucracy is...necessary but still...dull...
I'm five minutes into the presentation, Sir, and you already have me by the ..........you already have me more than willing to listen to all that you have to say.
Y'all are commenting on a 33 minute video that's only been up 19 mins
pathos: please give me chocolate, i would like it as if you where my long gone uncle. he used to bring a box of chocolates just for me every time he visits.
ethos: are you not gonna hand me a box of chocolate. last month a handed you three boxes of them and you should do the same. i mean its the right thing to do as a thank you to me for giving you such privilege of three hand wrapped boxes of chocolates.
logos: a box of chocolate has 8 pieces in total that said buying for a person. it being 10 dollars for a box is not a good sign. it'll cost more and more if you bought it from some gift shop or some other well known places that sells chocolates. in a chocolate store 8 pieces is just at least 3 dollars a box. its not only freshly made, its tasty and a bit lesser priced than those shop chocolate cause it doesn't need a fancy expensive box just to be tasty/
teacher lindybeige, did i get my answer's right? if not do assign me some more studies. I passed out right in the middle of your lecture.
Shut up, and take my chocolate!
pathos: i thank you for such a bar of chocolate. it would be rude if i didn't take it. i thank you once again.
ethos: don't mind if i take the chocolate away from your hands. i did ask didn't i not and so you gave me that box of chocolates there for i am obligated to take it and you are there to give it and stop the urge of taking the box back.
logos: yes chocolate.... where is the box of chocolate you are desired to give to me? yes this is the internet after all, you can only lie to give a box so in return i too shall lie about that mystical chocolate box that you intended to give. now let me ask you again, is the cake a lie or is that box of chocolate's, an even bigger lie.
Lloyd:
“I don’t like over-planned videos.”
Me, who spends 3-ish months on each video:
“Oh... ok...”
In the US, we have AP courses, one of which is AP Language and Composition, which heavily focuses on rhetoric. A proper understanding of argumentative and persuasive writing, and of rhetorical devices, is extremely useful.
By the way. I thoroughly agree with your manifesto for teaching more rhetoric. I'm a member of a debating club in London with that very mission, (albeit currently outside of the school system). We'd love to have you along some time.