Re: Stanley Fish
From: Christopher Green (cj.green_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 09/24/04
- Next message: Herman Rubin: "Re: History of French"
- Previous message: Des Small: "Re: Request: translate the following phrase into a non-English language"
- In reply to: Ron Hardin: "Stanley Fish"
- Next in thread: John Lawler: "Re: Stanley Fish"
- Reply: John Lawler: "Re: Stanley Fish"
- Reply: alexV: "Re: Stanley Fish"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 24 Sep 2004 08:50:26 -0700
Ron Hardin <rhhardin@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<4153F095.3124@mindspring.com>...
> Stanley Fish writes in the NYT, on Bush's superior rhetorical skills
>
> There is of course no logical relationship between the repetition of a
> sound and the soundness of an argument, but if it is skillfully
> employed repetition can enhance a logical point or even give the
> illusion of one when none is present.
>
> Not, though, if you notice it; as if the writer were falling over
> himself for his cleverness, indeed making a detour to show it.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/24/opinion/24fish.html
He managed to use a lot of words to describe what has been well known
as the Big Lie for a long time: repeat a lie often enough and loudly
enough, and people will forget it was never the truth.
Was the first use of "Big Lie" in description of Stalin's rhetoric, or
was it earlier?
-- Chris Green
- Next message: Herman Rubin: "Re: History of French"
- Previous message: Des Small: "Re: Request: translate the following phrase into a non-English language"
- In reply to: Ron Hardin: "Stanley Fish"
- Next in thread: John Lawler: "Re: Stanley Fish"
- Reply: John Lawler: "Re: Stanley Fish"
- Reply: alexV: "Re: Stanley Fish"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]