Tonight, I'm going to be talking about a bit of Edward Bernays's Propaganda. I found this clip from a BBC documentary The Century of Self. It's scary.
If need (or needs) be?
2 days ago
Showing posts with label rhetoric. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rhetoric. Show all posts
Monday, March 28, 2011
Saturday, November 7, 2009
A Writing/Reading/Texting Revolution
I'm reposting a message I received from a great listserv (techrhet, which means technology and rhetoric, the list where I find out all the cool stuff about technology).
One of the major list participants, Nick Carbone, noted SEED magazine's article called "A Writing Revolution," which he found via Andrew Sullivan's The Atlantic blog "The Daily Dish," a post he called "We're All Authors Now" (starting to feel like nested Russian dolls, huh? That's the power of the interwebs and the power of "reach" and "speed" as Laura Gurak once said).
Here's what Carbone sent to the list (emphasis added):
The key claim: Nearly universal literacy is a defining characteristic of today’s modern civilization; nearly universal authorship will shape tomorrow's.
The article measures the rate of authorship from 1400 to the present age, with a graph to show rates of change in authorship. It defines authorship as having a 100 readers. So one who tweets to a 100 follows, or writes an email like this to lists with over a 100 members, is counted as an author.
The analysis unfortunately includes some cyber-enthusiasm that makes some claims that stretch the argument too far, like this example of what seems to be a logical fallacy: "When United Airlines refused to reimburse a musician for damaging his guitar, the offended customer posted a song online—“United Breaks Guitars”—and United’s stock dropped 10 percent." -- is that Post Hoc Ergo Prompter Hoc?
There's no doubt more to pick at, but the chart and the measures of writing growth, and the fact digital technologies provide at least the potential for every writer to find at least a 100 readers (there's no guarantee that will happen) is very cool to see.
One of the major list participants, Nick Carbone, noted SEED magazine's article called "A Writing Revolution," which he found via Andrew Sullivan's The Atlantic blog "The Daily Dish," a post he called "We're All Authors Now" (starting to feel like nested Russian dolls, huh? That's the power of the interwebs and the power of "reach" and "speed" as Laura Gurak once said).
Here's what Carbone sent to the list (emphasis added):
The key claim: Nearly universal literacy is a defining characteristic of today’s modern civilization; nearly universal authorship will shape tomorrow's.
The article measures the rate of authorship from 1400 to the present age, with a graph to show rates of change in authorship. It defines authorship as having a 100 readers. So one who tweets to a 100 follows, or writes an email like this to lists with over a 100 members, is counted as an author.
The analysis unfortunately includes some cyber-enthusiasm that makes some claims that stretch the argument too far, like this example of what seems to be a logical fallacy: "When United Airlines refused to reimburse a musician for damaging his guitar, the offended customer posted a song online—“United Breaks Guitars”—and United’s stock dropped 10 percent." -- is that Post Hoc Ergo Prompter Hoc?
There's no doubt more to pick at, but the chart and the measures of writing growth, and the fact digital technologies provide at least the potential for every writer to find at least a 100 readers (there's no guarantee that will happen) is very cool to see.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Speech Act Theory-into-Practice
Today's Nobel Peace Prize for President Obama highlights the important accomplishment he's achieved: words matter. Speech *is* an action.
In our age of instant, global communication, Obama's changed the conversation. He's begun to resuscitate the American reputation. We can be proud that we no longer have a bully as a leader.
It's Rhetoric over War that's won: we rhetoricians should be proud to see the Nobel Prize's affirmation that words are actions, as John Austin reminds us in his philosophical How to Do Things with Words.
Austin reminds us that speech has "locutionary force" (the words refer to something); speech also has "illocutionary force" (there's a purpose for the words); speech too has "perlocutionary force" (it has an impact on the listener, who may then act or change).
In other words [ahem! :-)]
President Obama's rhetorical accomplishments are an example of the Practice of Peace. Negotiation and diplomacy lead to a more secure and peaceful coexistence than does violence.
Inviting is always better than Bullying.
In our age of instant, global communication, Obama's changed the conversation. He's begun to resuscitate the American reputation. We can be proud that we no longer have a bully as a leader.
It's Rhetoric over War that's won: we rhetoricians should be proud to see the Nobel Prize's affirmation that words are actions, as John Austin reminds us in his philosophical How to Do Things with Words.
Austin reminds us that speech has "locutionary force" (the words refer to something); speech also has "illocutionary force" (there's a purpose for the words); speech too has "perlocutionary force" (it has an impact on the listener, who may then act or change).
In other words [ahem! :-)]
- Words are accomplishments.
- Words *are* the results that some people insist are necessary for the Nobel Peace Prize.
President Obama's rhetorical accomplishments are an example of the Practice of Peace. Negotiation and diplomacy lead to a more secure and peaceful coexistence than does violence.
Inviting is always better than Bullying.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Rhetorical sophistication?
This semester, I have had to apologize to my students about getting behind with grading: it seems to me that honesty is a good policy, and I wanted them to know I was working on their writing, but I wasn't finished with assessing/evaluating/grading everyone's work at the same time.
Now I have two students who are using my apology as a weapon by telling the dean that they "didn't know how to improve" because I "didn't give them any feedback." *Sigh*.
Aristotle defines rhetoric as "finding the available means of persuasion." I guess I've made a means available to these students. This morning the dean called to tell me what arguments my students are going to have "against me" when we meet later this afternoon. The dean counsels me not to say something like this again . . . maybe she's right?
Now I have two students who are using my apology as a weapon by telling the dean that they "didn't know how to improve" because I "didn't give them any feedback." *Sigh*.
Aristotle defines rhetoric as "finding the available means of persuasion." I guess I've made a means available to these students. This morning the dean called to tell me what arguments my students are going to have "against me" when we meet later this afternoon. The dean counsels me not to say something like this again . . . maybe she's right?
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Need a class discussion?
Then watch this video:
"The Story of Stuff" is a 20-minute video argument that needs to be seen by everyone!
It's great for many, many reasons. For one thing, it'll explain to you why our government wants to send some citizens/taxpayers an "economic stimulus" check of a few hundred dollars but doesn't want to contribute an equal amount to things like education, health care, transportation infrastructure, etc. It'll also help understand something behind the partisan wrangling about the economic stimulus package.
Watch it until the end, too, to see ways to act.
"The Story of Stuff" is a 20-minute video argument that needs to be seen by everyone!
It's great for many, many reasons. For one thing, it'll explain to you why our government wants to send some citizens/taxpayers an "economic stimulus" check of a few hundred dollars but doesn't want to contribute an equal amount to things like education, health care, transportation infrastructure, etc. It'll also help understand something behind the partisan wrangling about the economic stimulus package.
Watch it until the end, too, to see ways to act.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Considering logic
In this political season (aren't they all?), we're bombarded with arguments by analogy. Most of these arguments contain the logical fallacy called a "weak [or false, faulty, questionable] analogy." It takes work to uncover the weak analogy, but perhaps this little story (stolen from here) will provide a bit of fun:
Consider: How is a raven like a writing desk? (In other words, how are these two analogous?) Most people might say they're not; they share no compelling characteristics.
Consider this answer: Poe wrote on both of them.
It's a joke, right? We know it's a weak analogy because the answer depends upon wordplay, the two meanings of "on" used simultaneously. (The ancient Greeks called this particular figure of speech or trope a "syllepsis.")
In other words: study logic and rhetoric today so you can become a better argument analyzer. Visit these sites:
Silva Rhetoricae
Gorgias's Weblog: "The Daily Trope"
CriticalThinking.org
Language Log
Electric Rhetoric
Consider: How is a raven like a writing desk? (In other words, how are these two analogous?) Most people might say they're not; they share no compelling characteristics.
Consider this answer: Poe wrote on both of them.
It's a joke, right? We know it's a weak analogy because the answer depends upon wordplay, the two meanings of "on" used simultaneously. (The ancient Greeks called this particular figure of speech or trope a "syllepsis.")
In other words: study logic and rhetoric today so you can become a better argument analyzer. Visit these sites:
Silva Rhetoricae
Gorgias's Weblog: "The Daily Trope"
CriticalThinking.org
Language Log
Electric Rhetoric
Friday, January 18, 2008
An English Course?
I'm intrigued by a professor's introduction to (or invitation to or commercial for) a UC-Irvine course called Digital Rhetoric 2007. The professor, Liz Losh, produced a number of videos on the topic.
For example, she presents a couple of what I might call "course lectures" that summarize the use of digital rhetoric: "2007, The Year in Digital Rhetoric" and "2006, the Year of Digital Rhetoric"
Both of these "lectures" would be great in any classroom, as would Losh's initial course invitation. In that video, she's explicit that such courses and the area of study (digital rhetoric) belong in an English department. I agree!
(Do you think I'm getting addicted to YouTube?!)
For example, she presents a couple of what I might call "course lectures" that summarize the use of digital rhetoric: "2007, The Year in Digital Rhetoric" and "2006, the Year of Digital Rhetoric"
Both of these "lectures" would be great in any classroom, as would Losh's initial course invitation. In that video, she's explicit that such courses and the area of study (digital rhetoric) belong in an English department. I agree!
(Do you think I'm getting addicted to YouTube?!)
