User:BeanBean677

"Kairos (καιρός) is an Ancient Greek word meaning the right, critical, or opportune moment. The ancient Greeks had two words for time: chronos (χρόνος) and kairos. While the former refers to chronological or sequential time, the latter signifies a proper or opportune time for action. What is happening when referring to kairos depends on who is using the word. While chronos is quantitative, kairos has a qualitative, permanent nature. Kairos also means weather in Modern Greek. The plural, καιροί (kairoi (Ancient and Modern Greek)) means the times."

Origins
In Onians' 1951 etymological studies of the word, he traces the primary root back to the ancient Greek association with both archery and weaving. In archery, kairos denotes the moment in which an arrow may be fired with sufficient force to penetrate a target. In weaving, kairos denotes the moment in which the shuttle could be passed through threads on the loom.

Kairos is also an alternate spelling of the minor Greek deity Caerus, the god of luck and opportunity.

Modern rhetorical definition
In his article "Critical-Rhetorical Ethnography: Rethinking the Place and Process of Rhetoric", Aaron Hess submits a definition of kairos for the present day that bridges the two classical applications. Hess addresses Poulakos’s view that, “In short, kairos dictates that what is said must be said at the right time.” He also suggests that in addition to timeliness kairos considers appropriateness. According to Hess, kairos can either be understood as, "the decorum or propriety of any given moment and speech act, implying a reliance on the given or known" or as, "the opportune, spontaneous, or timely." Although these two ideas of kairos might seem conflicting, Hess says that they offer a more extensive understanding of the term. Furthermore, they encourage creativity, which is necessary to adapt to unforeseen obstacles and opinions that can alter the opportune or appropriate moment, i.e. kairos. Being able to recognize the propriety of a situation while having the ability to adapt one’s rhetoric allows taking advantage of kairos to be successful. Hess’s updated definition of kairos concludes that along with taking advantage of the timeliness and appropriateness of a situation, the term also implies being knowledgeable of and involved in the environment where the situation is taking place in order to benefit fully from seizing the opportune moment.

Hess's somewhat conflicting perspective on kairos is exemplified by the disagreement between Lloyd F. Bitzer and Richard E. Vatz about the rhetorical situation. Bitzer argues that rhetorical situations exist independent of human perspective; a situation invites discourse. He discusses the feeling of a missed opportunity to speak (kairos) and the tendency to later create a speech in response to that unseized moment. However, Vatz counters Bitzer's view by claiming that a situation is made rhetorical by the perception of its interpreter and the way which they choose to respond to it, whether with discourse or not. It is the rhetor's responsibility to give an event meaning through linguistic depiction. Bitzer's and Vatz's perspectives add depth to Hess's ideas that kairos is concerned with both timeliness and appropriateness. On one hand, Bitzer's argument supports Hess's claim that kairos is spontaneous, and one must be able to recognize the situation as opportune in order to take advantage of it. On the other hand, Vatz's idea that the rhetor is responsible reinforces Hess's suggestion of the need to be knowledgeable and involved in the surrounding environment in order to fully profit from the situation.

The difficulty with modern rhetoric in the digital space is that the audience is less easily influenced by the rhetor. Due to the nature of which modern audiences in the electronic age consume media, it is highly possible that they are multi-tasking, with their attention divided among multiple sources. This difficulty is compounded with the fact that this audience can consume discourse at different times, in different places, and through varying mediums. As such, the audience is able to assign encountered discourse various levels of personal priority. Alisa's peer edit - week 5:

I think you guys are off to a good start with your article. There isn't an overwhelming amount of information that makes the article too convoluted, but important stuff is still listed. I suggest adding a section between "origins" and "modern rhetoric" about the use of kairos in classical rhetoric. Also, I would reword some the "modern rhetoric" section so that instead of using statements like "in his article" or directly naming a source, the sentence is an objective statement and sources are just listed in the citations. (I hope this makes sense)

Vanna's peer edit- week 5:

I believe you could expand on what kairos was before the more contemporary definitions came into play. For example, people like Gorgias, who was a sophist, was a big believer in kairos. One source to look more into would be the Sophistic Doctrine, which can be found in The Rhetorical Tradition. In the Sophistic Doctrine, kairos is defined as an “idea that elements of a situation, its cultural and political contexts,… will produce the best solutions to problems and best verbal means of presentation.” The sophists believed in this concept, whereas Plato believed that kairos was false rhetoric. He saw it as manipulative and corrupt. You could even expand on Bitzer's Rhetorical Situation, for his theory on rhetoric is very much reliant on the idea of kairos. You could briefly explain on how his focus was on the exigence, audience, and constraint of the rhetorical situation, and then create a link towards the wikipedia page that fully expands on this. As a part of the introduction or origins, you could say that those who liked the idea of kairos were the ones who favored style over content, for the sophists also believed that there was no absolute truth; therefore, one could make their own truth, have people believe, and increase the likelihood of people believing in it if it was done at the opportune moment.

Peer Review: Nate Tsegaw
What I enjoyed most about this article was that it included multiple sides of a debate of whether or not Kairos is important to ones rhetorical appeal. What this tells me is that you all are going to develop/edit an article that is complete with a diverse set of information, not just coming from either one source or viewpoint. Where I believe that you can expand on is the fine details of the arguments presented on each side of this Kairos debate. This is a subject I assume has a vast amount of scholarship on so while I do not doubt that there are resources available to you, there is most likely a lot to dig through. Because of this, as you begin to add more and more to your article think about whether or not the scholarship you do include is worthy. That way not only can you add to this article but you will do so in a meaningful way. Great start to your article!