rhetorical act chap 8

Listening to the propositions being circulated in my community, I see extremely large amounts of date and testimony being used as proof in discourse. Furthermore, more and more, I see extrinsic evidence completely replacing intrinsic means of invention. Like the book asserts, people are shying away from using the proof found within the art of rhetoric. Consequently, this trend leads to the loss of the ability for the general public to be able engage in and interpret the rhetorical issues, of any extraction, anymore. I believe that both intrinsic invention and extrinsic testimony and date are necessary in rhetoric and communication in general. It appears that this trend might be attributed to the high speed of information transmission. There is no time for people to look deeply into the issues so they rely on testimony and date to form their opinions for them. Also, invention through intrinsic means is looked at as sophistry that is not to be trusted; neglecting the fact that being engaged in discussion is more times than not more important than being right. Looking at some of the works I have composed recently, it is apparent that I make a conscious effort to build arguments through intrinsic means of invention and only use date and testimony to further support my claims. To me it is a matter of ethics, I am extremely skeptical of the credibility of those who base arguments solely on extrinsic proofs. I think that it is too easy for extrinsic date to be manipulated to suit an interest group and be presented as undisputable fact. Extrinsic proofs, in my rhetoric, are used carefully, and more times than not, are simply used as supplementary support for intrinsic arguments and do not stand alone as indubitable proof.