BITZER’S AND FISHER’S VIEW ON

RHETORIC
Bitzer and The Rhetorical Situation
What is a Rhetorical Situation?

Under what conditions does persuasion take place?

The same question can be made for rhetoric: under what

contexts does rhetorical discourse become possible? This
question was the basis for Bitzer’s (2009) article “The
Rhetorical Situation.” In this article, Bitzer (2009) defines
three elements that are required for rhetorical discourse to
exist.
  These elements are:

the rhetorical exigence

the rhetorical audience
the rhetorical constraints

Lloyd Frank Bitzer

 When combined, these three elements make up what Bitzer (2009) calls the
rhetorical situation. More broadly, Bitzer (2009) defines a rhetorical situation as “a
complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential
exigence which can be completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into
the situation, can so constrain human decision or action as to bring about the
significant modification of the exigence”
What is Rhetoric?

According to Bitzer (2009), “a work of rhetoric is pragmatic; it comes into existence

for the sake of something beyond itself; it functions ultimately to produce change or
action in the world; it performs some task”

 In other words, rhetoric is practical, purposeful communication that attempts to

create change in the world by enabling a rhetor to persuade people to change their
beliefs or solve problems.
Exigence
Whenever we wish to persuade an audience to take action or change their beliefs, we
must first have a clear definition of the problem we would like them to address. This
problem is what is known as exigence. A precise understanding of a problem better
equips us to find a solution, and enables the audience to better understand how their
behavior or beliefs could improve the situation.
Audience

The goal of rhetorical discourse is to “produce change by influencing the decision and
action of persons who function as mediators of change” (Bitzer, 2009, p. 20).
Obviously, we can’t do that without an audience.

 Like with exigence though, it is important to distinguish between an audience and a

rhetorical audience as they are not the same thing. For example, you have
probably walked by the dozens of bulletin boards on campus that advertise
different presentations that you can attend for free. In many of those cases, the
presenter is talking about their research. You could be in the audience for any of
those presentations and learn something new and valuable about a topic, but
would they push you to make a change?
According to Bitzer (2009), a rhetorical audience has two criteria.

The audience must be able to take action that can either solve the problem or at
least improve the situation.

This criterion might seem obvious, but it reminds us of the importance of finding a
way for our audience to solve, or at least mitigate, the problem we’ve identified, or of
finding an audience that has the power to do so.
Constraints
Obliviously, all this talk about convincing others to take action comes with some limits.
These limits are what Bitzer (2009) calls constraints. A constraint is anything that can
make it difficult for your message to be received. Sources of constraints include, but
are not limited to:

Beliefs, attitudes, documents, facts, traditions, images, interests, motives

These constraints are what limits a rhetor ‘s effectiveness in persuading their

rhetorical audience. It’s important to note, however, that these constraints come from
both sides. Specifically, a rhetor’s beliefs may affect how they design a message, and
similarly, an audience’s beliefs will determine how they receive that message.
Key Takeaways

Rhetoric is purposeful communication that aims to create change in the world by allowing a rhetor persuade an
audience to change their beliefs or solve problems.

The Rhetorical Situation is a combination of elements that determine whether it is possible to persuade others
in a given situation. These elements are rhetorical exigence, rhetorical audience, and constraints.

Exigence is a problem that needs to be addressed in a given situation. However, keep in mind that this
“problem” does not have to be negative in nature. An exigence can be something that needs to be said, or a task
that needs to be accomplished. As a result, not all exigence’s are rhetorical in nature.

A rhetorical exigence is one that can be affected by human activity. Preventing a winter storm is an exigence,
but it is not a rhetorical exigence because humans can not stop it. However, humans can take measure to
prepare for the storm to keep themselves safe. The act of persuading humans to prepare is rhetorical exigence.

A rhetorical audience is an audience that can take action that will either solve the problem or at least improve
the situation.

Constraints are elements—such as the beliefs, traditions, motives of your audience or yourself—that can
hinder your message. As a result they must be assessed in advance of your presentation and used to design
your message.
 Fisher’s view on Rhetoric

Walter R. Fisher
 Fisher proposed the narrative paradigm, the idea that man is a story telling animal at heart,
that human communication, especially argumentation, is largely a storytelling process, and
that one should test the narrative rationality of stories as a way to further test
argumentative grounds.
 What is Narrative paradigm?
 is a communication theory conceptualized by 20th-century communication
scholar Walter Fisher. The paradigm claims that all meaningful communication
occurs via storytelling or reporting of events. Humans participate as storytellers
and observers of narratives. This theory further claims that stories are more
persuasive than arguments. Essentially the narrative paradigm helps us to explain
how humans are able to understand complex information through narrative.
 Fisher uses the term paradigm rather than theory, meaning a paradigm is broader than a
theory. Fisher stated, "There is no genre, including technical communication, that is not an
episode in the story of life.For this reason, Fisher thought narration to be the ultimate
metaphor to encompass the human experience.
 The problem was that human beings were unable to make cohesive traditional arguments. At
the time, the rational world paradigm was the theory used to satisfy public controversies. He
believed that stories have the power to include a beginning, middle, and end of an argument
and that the rational world paradigm fails to be effective in sensemaking.
Group 4 Member
1. Ismael A. Kanakan
2. Aleja Joy S. Sinco
3. Amraida G. Kalonso- Balico
4. Nor-ain L. Anas
5. Nor-ann L. Anas
6. Cuneza Mae A. Abid
7. Jenevieve K. Gamueta
8. Edelyn A. Flores
9. Zoraida Joy C. Ledesma
10. Mary Jane C. Bendol
11. Ermalyn G. Enriquez
12. Aireen L. Rongcal
13. Dela Torre L.
14. Flores E.