But that is not to appear as nothing.
For as ostentatiously verbose my eloquence may appear perceivable be, the subject matter with which pertain’s relevance is nay paramount yet moot.
That is to say, eloquence, the art of public speaking, is not reliant on concrete subject matter, logically or emotionally formulated opinions and arguments, or thought provoking statement, it is instead reliant on the way in which said or any subject matter is delivered, accentuated in this TEDx Talk, by Will Stephen, in which we; think about what that guy said, look at the numbers, 4, 4, 24, and etc.
Now, out of context, those statements are non-sequitious, and nonsensical, but when delivered with gusto and confidence, and accompanied by equally non-sequitious charts, these statements become not only self evident, but relatable. For beyond subject matter, all TEDx speeches, nay, all TED speeches, nay all speeches in all of life are in their very nature, formulaic, and much in the same way speeches are formulaic, so is life.
That final statement is too non-sequitious, and is a subject matter which will not be revisited for the remainder of this blog post, however, it served its purpose, it was thought provoking, made one question their own existence, and if pertinent to the discussed topic, would act as an excellent segway to new topics. However, it is not pertinent, it simply is, its nature left to the inquisitive human to derive meaning from the innately meaningless.
For in the wikipedia article artfully entitled Art Oratoire, or Public Speaking, details not how to craft sound logical arguments or develop witty thorough analysis, but instead how to speak properly, how to make ones audience hear and believe them properly, how one should give speeches.
We as a people, since the dawn of humanity, have never been ones to praise scientific insight or well crafted argument. For virtually all of human history, even now, we have insulted the communities based upon the foundation of logically well thought out analysis in favor of the boisterous and verbally aggressive. The Church in the 1600’s had not evidence or sound reasoning in comparison to the countless evidence and logical theory presented by the scientific community, what they had was force, but not just physical, verbal voice and stature, a magnificent grandiose presence, loud and commanding, overpowering the single disrespected intellectual.
We do not respect the intellectual for the prowess with which he maintains in his brain, we respect the Church for their presence, their manner of speaking, simply put, their volume. In this same way we mindlessly respect those speakers at TED conferences, regardless of the subject matter of the matter they discuss, the meaningful or meaningless nature of their words is all negligible, for it is their stature, a TED attendee, and their methodology of speaking which Will Stephen so eloquently undermines and satirizes.
If one is to dissent against such unorthodox thought, contemplate on such, in school, what are we most consistently shown and required to analyze? Free-form speeches and thorough scientific journals and papers, or eloquent word combinations delivered to us through the TED foundation.
It matters not the subject, if all TED Talks were based in faith with little evidence except their faith, they would still most likely be preferred to scientific, logical papers, as simply stating factoids and then reaffirming why they are factoids with countless number of evidence and reasoning is nowhere near as rhetorically appealing as the verbose verbiage of eloquent nonsense (“And all the men of the city shall stone him with stones. . .” – Rhetorical masterpiece if there ever was one).
In this way, this AP Language course with which we participate in does not encourage logical reasoning but instead eloquent verbiage to accompany any reasoning, be it fallible or not, as evidenced by the subject of many of our concerning matters being in their very own nature fallible.
That is why there is truth to the statement that if the sound were to be muted, it would be comparable to a normal TED Talk. It is a TED Talk. After all, if A = B and B = C, then A = C.