Are rhetorical questions redundant?

Answer 1

No, a rhetorical question is a question posed in argument for purposes of answering the question--either explicitly or implicitly. For example, one might write, "Is there a life without purpose? No, because the most meaningless and vile existence can, at the very least, serve as an example to others." In this example, the question is raised, and then answered, in order to bring out a point.

Redundancy means unnecessary repetition of the same word or idea, as in "the general consensus." A consensus is always general, so there is no need to use the qualifier. An entire passage can be redundant as well--one might be making the same point twice.

Asking a rhetorical question, which, in prose or in a speech, may or may not be followed by an explicit answer, is an effective rhetorical technique.

Answer 2

no, their intention is to cause a train of thought mostly

if they weren't asked they would give the person communicated to, nothing extra to think about...

but there is an element of purposelessness in some, those that are poorly constructed or ones that merely reiterate an already visited thought...

even more that that something useless about rhetorical questions are when they're ones the asker goes on to answer themselves!..

still like another poster mentioned, there is an art to rhetorics, I doubt I have the hang of it yet...
what do you think?

Answer 3

Not quite. Rhetoric itself is finding more space in the media these days. The art of rhetoric, however, is getting obsolete.

Answer 4

In that they do not answer questions or explain points, yes!

However, in that they add to the clarity of an argument and or make the listoner/reader think about the subject in question, no.

Sort of having your cake and eating it, yes?

(Thought I'd throw a rhetorical question for effect.)

Answer 5

Not nearly as much as rhetorical answers.