Accidental Rhetoric and Being Vulnerable (original) (raw)
Related papers
Philosophy and Rhetoric, 2020
Discussion of this article on Live Theory podcast (thanks to Ryan Leack, Ellen Wayland-Smith, and Vorris Nunley): https://www.livetheory.org/podcast/episode/314032bd/ep9-nathan-stormer-rhetoric-by-accident This essay presents a concept of rhetoric by accident, which understands accidents in regard to the materiality of affection (i.e., the condition of being affected) and in regard to the unconditioned rhetoricity of affectability. The concept of accidental rhetoric put forth depends on the ontological condition of openness, so first affect is stipulated in relation to the porousness of material life to explain the inevitability of affection and provide the basis for understanding rhetoric by accident. Then the accident is defined in alignment with material openness. Rather than consider accidents in terms of human control over contingencies, accidents are defined by the contingency of purposiveness to affection. That affect occurs without purpose means that beings experience rhetoric without a plan (i.e., by accident). The essay then considers how rhetoric by accident is part of any particular rhetoric's existence, namely as a horizon of evolution and diversification for rhetoric.
The myth of the rhetorical situation
Philosophy & Rhetoric, 1973
In the opening Unes of "The Rhetorical Situation," Lloyd Bitzer states, "if someone says, That is a dangerous situation, his words suggest the présence of events, persons or objects which threaten him, someone else or something of value. If someone remarks, I find myself in an embarrassing situation, again the statement implies certain situational characteristics."1 These Statements do not imply "situational characteristics" at all. The Statements may ostensibly describe situations, but they actually only inform us as to the phenomenological perspective of the speaker. There can be little argument that the speakers believe they f eel f ear or embarrassment. Their Statements do not, however, tell us about qualities within the situation. Kenneth Burke once wrote of literary critics who attributed to others the characteristic of seeking escape: "While apparenüy defining a trait of the person referred to, thè term hardly did more than convey the attitude of the person making the référence."2 The same goes for the attribution of traits to a situation. It is a fitting of a scene into a category or catégories found in the head of the observer. No situation can hâve a nature independent of the perception of its interpréter or independent of the rhetoric with which he chooses to characterize it. In his article Bitzer states, "Rhetorical discourse is called into existence by situation"3 and "It seems clear that rhetoric is situational."4 This perspective on rhetoric and "situation" requires a "realist" philosophy of meaning. This philosophy has important and, I believe, unfortunate implications for rhetoric. In this article I plan to discuss Bitzer's view and its implications and suggest a différent perspective with a différent philosophy of meaning from which to view the relationship between "situations" and rhetoric.
Rhetorical appeal and the uncertainty of hope
Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif, 2013
The article examines an article that Dirk Smit wrote about rhetoric and theology against the background of other of his articles, particularly about the Confession of Belhar. It argues that Smit's article is "judiciously sceptical" about rhetoric because he is committed not only to faith, but also to the uncertainty of hope. This commitment is, it is argued, compatible with rhetoric, but only with a certain type of rhetoric. Such a hopeful rhetoric, which does not accept the closure of tragedy, reaches out to others across tragic divisions as the Confession of Belhar did. The final section examines how Smit's article is itself a rhetorical act and tries to identify the particular appeal he makes on readers. The machinery of language is so made that, either rightly or wrongly, either grandly or in fragments, we stretch forth our hands through love of the farther shore.
Risk communication from a rhetorical perspective
2010
Risks and crises constitute rhetorical situations, i.e. situations that call for discursive action. The aim of this chapter is to discuss how classical and modern rhetorical theories and methods contribute to research on threat images and risk and crisis communication. Research within the discipline of rhetoric focuses on the persuasive elements in discourses and conceives "rhetoricity" as being integrated into all kinds of communication. Rhetoric analysis offers well-structured methods for analysing content, style, form and argumentation, whether in texts, pictures, mediated communications or in direct dialogues and conversations. In this chapter, we exemplify the rhetorical approach by analysing public hearings concerning the question of nuclear waste management in Sweden. The hearings, conducted by the Swedish National Council for Nuclear Waste, are studied with regard to argumentation and underlying values. The analysis reveals a considerable gap between "technosphere" and "demosphere", i.e. expert discourse and civic discourse, respectively, which is far from an open and rational dialogue on this complex and crucial issue.
Rhetoric that Kills, Rhetoric that Heals
Extreme Orient Extreme Occident, 2012
Political context in early China for the development and use of rhetoric One day, Marquis Wen, head of the state of Wei (r. 424-387 BC) and hailed as a great patron of scholars, asked Tian Zifang, sitting in attendance, why he never took the trouble to mention who was his master. It is Shun (Docile) of the Eastern Wall, replied the counselor to his lord. After which he offered this description, taut and terse in wording, but long-lasting in effect: This man is truthfulness incarnate. He has the semblance of a human being, but inside the vacuity of Heaven. He holds fast to his authenticity while stringing along. In his purity, he can encompass everything. If someone is led astray, he makes him come to his senses by dint of his upright countenance. In his presence, people's intentions just evaporate. How could someone like me be qualiied to mention him?
From Substantial Risk to Social Relations and Rhetoric
The UK ‘at Risk’, 2019
From Substantial Risk to Social Relations and Rhetoric Chapters 4 and 5 approached the discourse semantic of at risk mainly as a description of substantial risks and the exposure of people, social groups and valued objects to physical harm. The chapters argued that substantial social changes and major challenges to the modern machinery fostered the swift increase of the at risk construct in The Times from the 1970s onwards. Chapter 6 now turns to the at the risk construct. The different, slightly downward trajectory, already indicates that at the risk occupies a different semantic space and opens the analysis to new dimensions of meaning. The book's approach to conceptualise at risk constructs as a linguistic practice rather than a physical entity (or as an epistemological rather than ontological concept) brings to light the rhetorical function of risk as part of a conversational prosody and the fading reporting of heroic risk-taking of people in everyday life. Such usages of at risk constructs have been neglected somewhat in the mainstream sociological approaches to risk, such as the cultural approach, risk society or governmentality. Still, such functions are part of the meaning of risk even when not responsible for the significant increase of risk words after the 1960s. As has been argued in Chap.
Changing the Subject: A Theory of RhetoricalEmpathy
Community Literacy Journal, 2020
The University of Tennessee Knoxville I n Changing the Subject: A Theory of Rhetorical Empathy, Lisa Blankenship poses a new theory for interacting ethically with other human beings by underscoring the role pathos and empathy hold in understanding differences. She explains how rhetorical empathy helps us connect with one another. Blankenship, citing Krista Ratcliffe's Rhetorical Listening, continues the important movement in rhetoric and composition toward storytelling and listening as a means of understanding. She emphasizes the current polarization happening in the United States as her exigence for writing. The basis for this project is the notion that "pathos. .. is one of the most powerful forms of persuasion and change" (5). As Blankenship writes, "[m]y purpose is to frame pathos in new ways and make a case for rhetorical empathy as a means of ethical rhetorical engagement" (5). In her introduction, Blankenship defines the book's key terms, namely pathos, empathy, and rhetorical empathy. She defines empathy as "an epistemology, a way of knowing and understanding, a complex combination of intention and emotion" (7). Blankenship's reason for using the term empathy is explained by her discussion of how pity is often used in contexts of colonization and other cultural movements in which the self is disconnected from the struggles of others (5). She defines pathos as "appeals to the personal in the form of stories and the (always political) emotions that can ensue" (7). Rhetorical empathy, for Blakenship, encompasses how rhetoric, empathy, and pathos intermingle to form a cohesive whole. She characterizes rhetorical empathy as "coming alongside or feeling with the experiences of an Other rather than feeling for or displacing an Other, which is usually associated with pity or sympathy" (7-8). Building from Ratcliffe's foundational work, Blankenship strives to alter the "the focus of rhetoric from (only) changing an audience to changing oneself (as well) and extending rhetorical listening in new directions by accounting for the role of the personal and the emotions in rhetorical exchange" (18). After foregrounding these pivotal terms, she recounts the origin story of this book on rhetorical empathy
Rhetorical Agency in the Face of Uncertainty
Poroi, 2015
Living with global terrorism, global epidemics, and new medical technologies has made risk a dominant theme in the 21st century in terms of both individual action and public policy. This condition has led us to become more occupied with debating, preventing, and managing risks. Risk Society, 1996 Any time we read or watch the news, the global, scientifically saturated nature of the world becomes apparent. Current events pertaining to medical risks in particular have become increasingly significant. Take, for example, the recent Ebola situation in which we have witnessed how infectious disease threat and communication of risk ignite and stoke public frenzy about how to act and whom to blame. Think of the news coverage on whether the "infected Dallas nurse and other innocent bystanders vulnerable to contracting Ebola. Also consider the treatment politically issuedwent for a bike ride. Perceptions of harm get encased in public talk where case scenario" storylines not only dominate and d but also lead to action. In this regard, and in response to her quarantine orders specifically, the
Investigating the Rhetorical Unconscious
In the 1980s, rhetoric scholars in the United States and Canada, including Raymie McKerrow, Maurice Charland, Michael C. McGee and Phillip Wander, began to challenge the Aristotelian paradigm that then dominated rhetorical scholarship. Aristotle maintained that rhetoric, as an art, consisted of finding all the available means of persuasion in a given situation, arguing that rhetoric is a function of the intentions of rhetors. Under the general title of critical rhetoric, however, a new generation of rhetorical theorists began to draw upon the insights of Continental linguists and philosophers such as Ferdinand de Saussure, Michel Foucault, Louis Althusser, Jacques Derrida, and Jacques Lacan to question this intentionalist paradigm, arguing that much of the rhetorical enterprise is largely unconscious. This essay, after discussing various ways that rhetoric has been conceptualized in the United States and Europe, discusses the evolution of critical rhetoric and its larger relevance for rhetorical theory and criticism, paying particular attention to more recent developments.