Describe and characterize the nature of invention for both Luther and Erasmus.

Description

 chapters 5,6,and 7. Thomas Conley, Rhetoric in the European Tradition (Chicago: UC Press, 1990).

In the third module we see rhetoric undergoing some curious transformations, most notably in the status of “invention.” Recall that for Aristotle invention involves the process of discovering “what’s available” to move an audience “in a given case.” Beneath this assertion is a statement about the shifting nature of rhetoric’s “grounds,” because not all sources of proof are equally available in a given case. Hence, rhetoric is a chameleon that takes on different colors in different situations, and in different bodies.

One particularly stark way of seeing this phenomenon play out is in the exchange between Luther and Erasmus over the question of “Free Will.” Reading through the back and forth of this debate we see quite vivid contrasts in terms of style, reasoning, and tone. These contrasts in turn illuminate two different conceptions of rhetorical invention. Thus, in this third paper your task is:

Describe and characterize the nature of invention for both  Luther and Erasmus.

If invention involves the process of discovering one’s available persuasives, then how does this process work differently for Erasmus and Luther? Other ways of asking this question include: What counts as “knowledge” or “truth” for each individual? What sources and kinds of “proof” do they draw on? What do they consider to be authoritative, and what not? How do they establish their arguments? How do they use language and style? By what means do they attempt to persuade each other? How do they create forcefulness and a winning appeal through their efforts?

The task of characterizing the nature of invention is essentially that of reverse-engineering someone’s attempt to persuade someone else. Thus, your main focus needs to be on the particulars of that effort, so the success of this paper will depend on how well you describe and explain the relevant details of Erasmus’ and Luther’s rhetorical efforts.