"Socrates suspects rhetoric--especially as it is practiced by the sophists--as a dangerous deferral of the pursuit of ideal truth" (41).
Rhetoric:
1. the available means of persuasion
2. the study of misunderstanding and its remedies
3. the performance of literacy
4. everything
Or perhaps as Socrates suggests, rhetoric is a dangerous tool. Taking rhetoric outside of the writing classroom for a minute, since "rhetoric is everything" anyway, and examining it in the context of a medical lab, a courtroom, or a boardroom, rhetoric has the power to begin and stop research, free and imprison the innocent, and make and break billion-dollar deals. Since persuasion has become such a powerful player in everything from politics to aesthetics, has it become an obstacle to the pursuit of truth, justice, and honor? Do we turn to "base rhetoric" to rationalize poor decisions we make or poor actions we take in order to sleep more soundly at night? When did the power to persuade become the power to excuse and abuse?
In Covino's brief history of rhetoric, it is clear that over the years, scholars have favored Aristotle's notion of contingent, relative truth over Plato's notion of ideal truth. In this sense, the end point of the history of rhetoric is fairly similar to Aristotle's starting point: reality is constructed by language. By using language to define our own realities and our own truths, and eventually redefine our own realities and our own truths, this notion of rhetoric does not simply help us see ambiguity and "misunderstandings," but, more severely, it serves as a hallucinogen that distorts and manipulates.
I need to keep thinking about this...particularly as someone who is teaching a composition and rhetoric course.
In the meantime, I will enjoy reading the theories of rhetorical scholars who do what Plato warns all against: talking in circles to prove their own points rather than working together in pursuit of the truth.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Laura, I think your cautions are worth heeding. The John Gage article that I posted a link to deals with some of these concerns, and all of his writing seems highly aware of the high ideals of rhetoric and the low practice of it by human beings. One of his students told him one time, after reading Gage's 10 rules for rhetorical argument, that following those rules means the other guy wins! Perhaps rhetoric as deliberative discourse only works well in a community of peers--people who respect each other and have the good of the polis in mind. Establishing community, then, may be just as important as understanding rhetorical principles. Thus we should link collaborative pedagogy to rhetorical pedagogy. Steve
Post a Comment