I interpreted the whole section of Roman rhetoric as sort of a transition from Greek. I really don’t see a huge difference, just some blending, expanding, and perhaps a few omitted concepts.
The history involved in the origin of Roman rhetoric is very intriguing. Alexander’s establishment of the Enkylios Paideia was essential to the establishment of Roman rhetoric. I found the idea that Alexander “ slept with a dagger and a copy of the Illiad beneath his pillow.” The possible myth that he spent 2 years studying under Aristotle (if it is true) probably didn’t hurt in establishing the formal system of education.
Enkylios Paideia or “the Rounded Education” is made up essentially of what equates to our modern-day general education requirements here at UNCW.
Romans carried on and it seems like they took the better of the two theories of persuasiveness and combined them together. They use some of the organizational techniques originated by the Greeks, for example, the five parts of speech:

1. prolouge/prooiminon

2. narration/diegesis

3. argument/pistis

4. rebuttal/lysis

5. conclusion/epilogos

Diodorus “harkens back to the vision of Isocrates” in the following statement:

“ History also contributes to the power of speech, than which no nobler thing may easily be found. For it is speech (logos) which makes the Greeks superior to the barbarians, the educated (pepaideumenoi) to the uneducated; and more importantly, by means of speech alone that one man is able to prevail over many.”

The Romans may not have trusted the Sophists, but the did use their same idea of eloquent speech, Yet, Roman focus is still set on education—for bettering their government—not to make a quick buck.

My Money's on Simon...

So…Greek Rhetoric.

I understand it in an oversimplified manner…the smaller, more detailed terms are rather confusing. I understand the terms individually, but when I try to match them to the form of Rhetoric they are associated with, I get confused. The Sophists (Protagoras, Gorgias) were Greeks who loved to preach, and persuade the other Greeks to believe them using language. They also liked to make a great deal of money on the side, charging others who needed their gift of gab. Other Greeks like Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates preferred a Q&A, investigative type of rhetoric. They challenged the Sophists because they believed they used their spell-like language to be fallacious and misleading. After the few selections we have read, I believe I like the latter; questioning something or someone's validity is never a bad thing.

We discussed the 2006 State of the Union Address in class this past week. I was watching TV—some sort of E! or Extra or some celebrity show—and they said that American Idol garnered an audience of approximately 33 million viewers this past Tuesday evening. So I got to wondering how many viewers Dubya pulled in… 42 million. Only 9 million more than Idol, and he could have easily had less if Idol wasn’t on at all. The Washington post said Idol came to President Bush’s rescue with “the aid of a belly dancer, a self-spanker, a faux Rastafarian, a pet hoarder, an adorable set of twins, and a mess of delusional people in Las Vegas.”

American Idol assistance aside…I wondered if more people watched the Presidential Debates as opposed to the State of the Union. I know it’s a time of decision-making—many people(like myself) watch the debates for assistance or assurance in their voting decision. The 2004 Bush Kerry Debates reeled in 62.5 million viewers—20.5 million more than the 2006 SOTU address.

It seems to me like people would rather watch a good face-off than receive a scripted sermon. A one-way conversation isn’t all that interesting. These days—with constant media coverage and the Internet—people have their minds made up before the President even opens his mouth. A SOTU address is pretty much useless because, thanks to the media, we already know it. It’s a ceremonial standard that the Sophists would be proud of. Who knows, they might have even tried to make some money off good old George.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/01/AR2006020102417_pf.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-10-02-debate-ratings_x.htm