1)The first key take a way point in Chapter 8 Rhetorical Situations of Rhetoric in Civic Life by Catherine Palczewski is about deliberative discourse, forensic discourse, and epideictic discourse. Deliberative discourse is defined as “rhetoric that addresses broad public audiences and concerns that merits of proposals for future courses of action” (Pg. 226). This discourse uses rhetoric to figure out things like legislation and “ways and means” as described by the book. Forensic discourse is “rhetoric that occurs when a designated audience (such as jury) judges the argument about events in the past and accusations of wrongdoing” (Pg. 226). This type of rhetoric is used when a group of people come to a common agreement and then uses rhetoric to persuade the last person what to do. Epideictic discourse “speeches of praise or blame, usually delivered to audiences assembled during ceremonial occasions, and oriented to the present moment, while calling on the past to inform the future” (Pg. 226). When we look at these three we can relate deliberative discourse to the law making stage and citizens voting on what they want. Forensic discourse is the law half where you are given you fait from the court and Epideictic discourse is used in places like churches.
2)The second key take away point is rhetorical audience which is “ an audience that “consists only of those persons who are capable of being influenced by discourse and of being mediators of change”” (Pg. 229) I never really thought of this but the rhetorical audience is only those that are affected by the discourse. If I have no care in what these people are bringing awareness about then I am not part of the rhetorical audience because I am not being persuaded to do anything due to my lack of caring for that subject.
3)The last key take away point in chapter 8 is contextual reconstruction. Contextual reconstruction is defined in the book as “ a response in which a rhetor attempts to redefine the situation” (Pg. 255). This is probably one of the most important steps when it comes to rhetoric in my opinion. Due to being in many arguments personally I know contextual reconstruction is a huge part of proving a point. If you and another person are arguing over something it can easily get off topic and become a new argument. If you use contextual reconstruction then you bring back up your original point to remind the audience where you were going with the argument.