| dc.description.abstract | An essay on truth and rhetoric belongs to the issues concerning the relativity of meaning of the word. Taking into
consideration scientific theories that language organizes the reality and influences the view of the world, as well
as assuming that linguistic relativity considers possible methods of perceiving the reality within the limits of a
given culture, the author assesses an interpretation of the pronounced words in the categories of probability and
opinion, depending on people and circumstances. Therefore, she differentiates between rhetoric employed through the
method of solid argumentation and the sophistic reasoning based on the use of ambiguity of terms and dishonest
argumentation to prove a false thesis. Placing together the Aristotle’s example of the entanglement of an adversary
in a contradiction and the public speeches of some well-known people, results in bringing about an explanation why
in human communication the truth depends on a relationship between the speaker and the listeners, and also why, in
a dialog, apart from understanding, there is also a place for faith and trust to the speaker, within the space of
commonly shared values. The author differentiates between the arguments referring to truth and those referring to
support. She concludes that the support of a given position does not come under the assessment in the categories of
truth and falsehood, while the responsibility for the truth falls on the speaker for he obtained the truth not for
himself but to share it with others. | en |
