Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Question 2

The Greeks said that you had to be a morally good person to speak. I, on the other hand, disagree with this. You can be a terrible person, yet you speak in such a manner that you have people following you, people who make crazy arrangements just to hear you speak, and you can be one that society, in the end, deems evil. For example, Charles Manson. He committed a string of acts that the eyes of society and the law deemed evil; however he was able to persuade an entire group of followers that what he was involved in was logical and right.

This might be an extreme example, however I find it to be an important point. Just because someone can speak, and persuade, and change the minds of people with or without logical backing, that doesn't mean they have to be a good person.

In my opinion, I think society would like to think that to be a good speaker you would only speak the truth; that you only speak what seems morally "right"; that you are a "good" person. Yet there are oppositions to every side, and each side has its' own skeletons in their closets.

2 comments:

  1. Nessa,
    I completely agree with your post about how we would all like to believe public speakers speak of goodness and the truth yet that is not always the case. Some public speakers can be so skilled in persuasion that leads to their audience brainwashed and believing them.

    I also really liked your example of Charles Manson. I just watched a show on TV about him recently and it is truly amazing the things he accomplished with only his power of speech. He was linked to and convicted of several murders without laying a finger on any of the victims. Unfortunately, Manson used his speaking talents for evil.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hello Nessaw27! You mentioned Charles Manson. Do you think he would have been more persuasive had his intentions been pure and deemed not evil? Meaning, what kind of impact could he have had, had he channeled his energy otherwise? Also, do you personally think speakers are more effective when they are 'seemingly' morally good? :)

    ReplyDelete