Editing Rhetoric (section)

== Animal rhetoric ==
{{Essay-like|section|date=September 2023}}
Rhetoric is practiced by [[social]] animals in a variety of ways. For example, birds use [[Bird vocalization|song]], various animals warn members of their species of danger, [[Common chimpanzee|chimpanzees]] have the capacity to deceive through communicative keyboard systems, and deer stags compete for the attention of mates. While these might be understood as [[Animal communication|rhetorical actions]] (attempts at persuading through meaningful actions and [[utterance]]s), they can also be seen as rhetorical fundamentals shared by humans and animals.<ref>{{cite book |title=Comparative Rhetoric: An Historical and Cross-Cultural Introduction |last=Kennedy |first=George A. |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |year=1998 |isbn=978-0-19-510932-0 |location=New York |pages=11–28}}</ref> The study of animal rhetoric has been called "biorhetorics".<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kull |first1=Kalevi |author-link=Kalevi Kull |year=2001 |title=A note on biorhetorics |url=https://www.academia.edu/6409666 |journal=[[Sign Systems Studies]] |volume=29 |issue=2 |pages=693–704 |doi=10.12697/SSS.2001.29.2.16 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

The [[self-awareness]] required to practice rhetoric might be difficult to notice and acknowledge in some animals. However, some animals are capable of [[mirror test|acknowledging themselves in a mirror]], and therefore, they might be understood to be self-aware and therefore, argue philosophers such as Diane Davis, are able to engage with rhetoric when practicing some form of language.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Davis |first=Diane |year=2011 |title=Creaturely Rhetorics |journal=Philosophy and Rhetoric |volume=44 |issue=1 |pages=88–94 |doi=10.5325/philrhet.44.1.0088 |jstor=10.5325/philrhet.44.1.0088 |quote=[Mirror self-recognition] has long been used to test self-awareness in human children: researchers place a mark on the child’s face, and if the child spontaneously uses the mirror to touch this otherwise imperceptible mark, she is considered self-aware. But these nonhuman creatures passed the test, too—as if such scientific evidence were necessary to confirm that certain animals represent themselves to themselves and others. . . . Any creature capable of even minimal self-reference is already in language, already responding; that is to say, it is both defined by its irreducible rhetoricity and, more importantly for our purposes, already practicing rhetoric .}}</ref>

Anthropocentrism plays a significant role in human-animal relationships, reflecting and perpetuating binaries in which humans assume they are beings that have extraordinary qualities while they regard animals as beings that lack those qualities. This dualism is manifested in other forms as well, such as reason and sense, mind and body, ideal and phenomenal in which the first category of each pair ([[reason]], [[mind]], and [[Platonic ideal|ideal]]) represents and belongs to only humans. By becoming aware of and overcoming these dualistic conceptions including the one between humans and animals, humans will be able to more easily engage with and communicate with animals, with the understanding that animals are capable of reciprocating communication.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Segeerdahl|first=Pär|year=2015|title=The rhetoric and prose of the human/animal contrast|journal=Language & Communication|volume=42|pages=36–49|doi=10.1016/j.langcom.2015.03.001}}</ref> The relationship between humans and animals (as well as the rest of the natural world) is often defined by the human rhetorical act of naming and categorizing animals through [[Taxonomy (biology)|scientific]] and [[Folk taxonomy|folk]] labeling. The act of naming partially defines the rhetorical relationships between humans and animals, though both may engage in rhetoric beyond human naming and categorizing.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Melzow|first=Candice Chovanec|date=Spring 2012|title=Identification, Naming, and Rhetoric in The Sky, the Stars, the Wilderness and The Maine Woods|journal=Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment|volume=19|issue=2|pages=356–74|doi=10.1093/isle/iss084}}</ref>

Some animals have a sort of {{transliteration|grc|[[Phronesis|phrónēsis]]}} which enables them to "learn and receive instruction" with rudimentary understanding of some significant signs. Those animals practice deliberative, judicial, and [[epideictic]] rhetoric deploying {{transliteration|grc|ethos}}, {{transliteration|grc|logos}}, and {{transliteration|grc|pathos}} with gesture and preen, sing and growl.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Kennedy|first=George|year=1992|title=A Hoot in the Dark The evolution of general rhetoric|jstor=40238276|journal=Philosophy & Rhetoric|volume=25|number=1|pages=1–21}}</ref> Since animals offer models of rhetorical behavior and interaction that are physical, even instinctual, but perhaps no less artful, transcending our accustomed focus on verbal language and consciousness concepts will help people interested in rhetoric and communication to promote human-animal rhetoric.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Hawhee|first=D.|year=2011|title=Toward a Bestial Rhetoric|journal=Philosophy and Rhetoric|volume=44|number=1|pages=81–87|doi=10.5325/philrhet.44.1.0081|jstor=10.5325/philrhet.44.1.0081}}</ref>