Argumentation and Communication

In the article titled “The Rhetoric Situation,” Bitzer holds that communication has no specific formulae, as each individual reserves the opportunity to make a rhetoric discourse depending on the rhetoric situation presented. According to the author, argumentation and communication work differently because of the ability to make comments on specific situations. This is due to the existence or there not of the rhetoric situations. Just as the speaker asserts, argumentation and communication would exist in the absence of rhetoric if there are no problems or need for changes that are presented to alter the dynamics of the two practices. 

Wayne Brockriede, the writer of the article Arguers as Lovers holds various thoughts on communications and arguments. According to the author, arguments are made or can be made differently depending on the evaluations presented by the arguer. This means that since a person presenting an argument is a human being, their presentation can be understood from the standpoint of the individual and how they arrange their opinions, thoughts or premises. The author gives examples of instances provided by lovers, seducers, and rapists, showing that their way of communication and presentation of arguments are different based on the type of people they are. Therefore, Brockriede holds that arguments and communication become successful or fail based on the arguers and communicators and how they go about with human interaction.

I relate to the excerpt by Wayne Brockriede more because of the fact that the author touches on the arts of communication and argumentation in a more practical manner. The author provides real life scenarios to explain what argumentation and proper communication entails and how they affect human beings. The article is also relatable because it eliminates all doubts on communication and argumentation, as he explains that the two practices depend on an individual and how they present their case