Francis Bacon (1561 - 1626)-----although not a rhetorician, contributed to the field in his writings. One of the concerns of the age was to find a suitable style for the discussion of scientific topics, which needed above all a clear exposition of facts and arguments, rather than the ornate style favored at the time. Bacon in his The Advancement of Learning criticized those who are preoccupied with style rather than "the weight of matter, worth of subject, soundness of argument, life of invention, or depth of judgment." On matters of style, he proposed that the style conform to the subject matter and to the audience, that simple words be employed whenever possible, and that the style should be agreeable.
Heck I am still learning. But if I only said what you wanted to hear, then would you have heard anything different? :) You try and incorporate the logic into the statement? Here in this case, there is no arguement, because the logic can not be further reduced?
Word play is a literary technique in which the nature of the words used themselves become part of the subject of the work. Puns, obscure words and meanings, clever rhetorical excursions, oddly formed sentences, and telling character names are common examples of word play.
All writers engage in word play to some extent, but certain writers are particularly adept or committed to word play. Shakespeare was a noted punster. James Joyce, whose Ulysses, and even more so, his Finnegans Wake, are filled with brilliant writing and brilliant word play is another noted word-player. For example, Joyce's phrase "they were yung and easily freudened" clearly conveys the meaning "young and easily frightened", but it also makes puns on the names of two famous psychoanalysts, Jung and Freud.
But here is another context of character masking that was revealled? Thinking about Francis Bacon, that one wonders, who was Shakespeare?
THE SHAKESPEARE/BACON CONTROVERSYFAUSTIN BRAY: Do you think that academia will eventually recognize this?
Who Is Arthur Young
We know well that some writers take pen names before they become established? Or hide amidst the current dealings of society. To not call attention to their positions in life, while they strive to delve into the deeper meanings or hide a message for others?:)
I learnt this early, to not complicate life, while I could have free roam, to delve into all aspects of our human natures. Struggle for, the ideals that we develope in life. Rote systemic appearances constituted from our early histories, as well shape our perceptions of society. I knew well, that if we think a certain way, whether we like it or not, we desemminate thoses principals into society, how ever it materialized, might be perceived in different ways.
So can we be artistic about it? I am, in choosing my characters becuase I saw in rhetoric and dialogue, past performaces by independant scientific researchers, this incination to go back in time, and then move forward.
Plato's cave might have seem ole fashion and constantly wornout and used, but in the scientific mind of Gerard Hooft, and his explanation of Holographical design, he wanted to push other minds to consider?
And one in which I like to consider, that a three dimensional frame work, can be arrived at from higher perception abilities. In science, four dimensional characteristics here would have understood dynamcial feature to the nature of reality, yet pinning it down to coordinates, it becomes realizstic in our minds, as a object of perception.
Heisenberg made similar use of such inclination for historical reference. His uncertainty in movement became interesting references, once we assumed a position?:)
This logic has underpinnings in how we see what can be consittuted in life. How we choose to display our positions with clarity.
That we should then find ourselves engaged because of the inhernet dialogue and espressions between each other on the internet, then we know that progression and learning, the desire, and not flaws of character dispositon should reign.
But now onto some more references for consideration here to help people digest, what could have ever arrive in our coordinated frames of reference. That we saw, other means to arrive at this conclusion. One of these means, is a Calormetric view? I use this while I think about the space between the earth and the sun. While looking at insightful ways to generate more possiblities, in the minds, that are resistant to change.
Standard particle reductionist methods have detailed how we shall see these energy considerations. So to apply a global perspectve to energy valuations, we are left to consider simpler model reductionist figures here in our talks, about climate change? Visions of non-euclidean world that few will take hold of in our consverstions. etc.
Resistance to character, should be statistics or better information?