POROI 10.1 contains articles by Celeste Condit, G. Thomas Goodnight, and Joshua Welsh. They are linked by a thematic concern with how new technologies affect common sense and deliberation. Condit, University of Georgia, suggests that digital communication can become an effective means of deliberation and decision. Welsh, Central Washington University, contrasts Aristotle’s negative attitude toward the effect of new technologies on common sense with the more welcoming attitude of modern rhetorical theorists. Goodnight, University of Southern California, argues that the architectonic rhetorical theories of modernity must give way in the digital era to “polytechtonic” approaches.The issue also contains reports from the 2013 pre-conference of the Association for the Rhetoric of Science and Technology (ARST). They are about how rhetorical scholars are working with scientists as communication consultants on funded collaborative research projects. These reports are by Caroline Druschke, University of Rhode Island; Jean Goodwin and her collaborators at Iowa State University; Sara Parks, Iowa State University; John Reif, University of Pittsburgh; and Kenny Walker, University of Arizona. The reports are introduced by Jean Goodwin, Iowa State University. They are commented on by Jamie L. Vernon, Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, and Leah Cecarrelli, University of Washington.
POROI welcomes submissions that bring rhetorical invention and criticism to bear on the production, circulation, and consumption of claims to knowledge in all disciplines, professions, communities, and cultures.
Archive for the ‘Rhetoric’ Category
Via the RSA, basic information on grant opportunities for women scholars engaged in projects focused on the history of rhetoric, including synopses. Click on the link below for more information:
April 11-13, 2014
Wake Forest University
Winston-Salem, North Carolina
The 15th Biennial Wake Forest University Argumentation Conference will feature keynote addresses by Hans Hansen, Ekaterina Haskins, and Catherine Palczewski, as well as a special workshop with Frans van Eemeren and a workshop for undergraduate students with Gordon Mitchell.
The Biennial Wake Forest Argumentation Conference began in November, 1983, with a one-day conference on the Wake Forest University campus. After again meeting on the Wake Forest campus in 1985, the Conference was convened in 1987 in the Wake Forest study abroad facility, Casa Artom, in Venice, Italy, with co-sponsorship from the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA). The conference has subsequently alternated between “the Venice Conference” and domestic sites.
The 15th Wake Forest University Argumentation Conference will take place concurrent with the 2014 Wake Debate Reunion in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
We invite papers, panel and seminar submissions: (more…)
June 3 – 9, 2013
The Institute will commence with five Seminars running from Monday to Friday, June 3-7, culminating in a plenary luncheon. After lunch on the 7th, twenty Workshops begin and will run to midday on Sunday, June 9th.
Registration for the 2013 RSA Summer Institute in Lawrence, KS is open! If you have been accepted into a Workshop or a Seminar (or if you are a session leader), it’s time to register. To do so, please visit http://www.continuinged.ku.edu/programs/rhetoric-society/. If you are a session leader or a graduate student, you will need a special code to receive the appropriate discounts. You should have received this code already. If you are not a session leader or a graduate student, you do not need a code to register. The Registration deadline is April 1, 2013.
Related news: Information on Lodging for the Institute can be found here:http://rhetoricsociety.org/aws/RSA/pt/sp/institute_lodging.
David Zarefsky, Northwestern University
Robert C. Rowland, University of Kansas
Jean Goodwin, Iowa State University
Jeanne Fahnestock, University of Maryland
Frans H. van Eemeren, University of Amsterdam
Argumentation is the study of how people justify their acts, beliefs, attitudes, and values, and influence the thought and actions of others, by providing good reasons for the claims they make. This subfield includes both descriptive study (what do people consider to be good reasons and what are they doing when they offer what they take to be justifications?) and normative investigation (under what circumstances should claims be considered justified?). It addressesboth argumentation in general and argumentation in specific contexts such as law, business,science, religion, and public affairs. (more…)
“Speech Acts and Arguments”
The aim of this meeting is to discuss the current research strands of speech act theory – one of the most prominent philosophical traditions which strongly influenced the study of communication and argumentation in the 20th century. The foundations of speech act theory were laid by John R. Searle who is widely recognised for his contributions to the philosophy of language, philosophy of mind and social philosophy. Searle received his degrees from the University of Wisconsin (1949-52) and Oxford University (1952-59, as a Rhodes Scholar). For over 50 years he has been working at the University of California, Berkeley, where he is currently Slusser Professor of Philosophy. In his book Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language (Cambridge University Press, 1969), which is the most outstanding classical position in the field, Searle synthesized the ideas of such philosophers as Austin and Wittgenstein, and gave his original account of speech acts.
Speech act theory finds many interdisciplinary applications. Amongst the most important in formal linguistics is Segmented Discourse Representation Theory (SDRT) by Nicholas Asher (Toulouse) and Alex Lascarides (Edinburgh) which combines ideas from dynamic semantics, common-sense reasoning and speech act theory (Logics of Conversation, Cambridge University Press, 2003). SDRT proposes to treat speech acts as relations between utterances. As a result, it allows to formally model a wide range of communicative phenomena where semantics and pragmatics interact in complex ways, such as: nominal anaphora, lexical sense modulations in context, bridging inferences, presuppositions, metaphor, questions and responses, imperatives, non-sentential fragments, indirect speech acts, grounding, non-cooperative conversation.
Other invited speakers (more…)
I’ve written on this blog before about the ways in which I think political discourse in the US serves democracy poorly. A recent article by David Gewirtz at ZDNet on the subject of the moral status of DDoS attacks has prompted me to write about this topic again.
4th Summer Institute On Argumentation:-
Multi‐Modal Arguments: Making sense of images (and other non‐verbal content) in Argument
May 27-31, 2013
- Can works of art, films, virtual realities and other kinds of non-verbal content operate as arguments?
- Why have some objected to this suggestion? What can we learn from their objections?
- How can the various theoretical perspectives that make up argumentation theory, such as informal logic, rhetoric, dialectics, dialogue theory, and discourse analysis, account for multi-modal arguments?
- How can we construct a comprehensive theory of argument that makes room for, explains, and allows us to assess, arguments of this sort?
In conjunction with the tenth OSSA (Ontario Society for the Study of Argument) conference, CRRAR will offer a summer institute on multimodal arguments.
One trend in the development of argumentation theory is an increasingly broad conception of argument which recognizes (among other things) the use of “multi-modal” elements – images, music, and other non-verbal components – as key components of many arguments. In this course we consider the questions that this raises. (more…)
16th Biennial Rhetoric Society of America Conference
May 22-26, 2014
Marriot River Center – San Antonio, Texas
San Antonio is an ideal city for thinking about borders. Not only has the city been positioned along different national borders, but it also exists at the interesting intersection of diverse cultures and histories. “Border Rhetorics” not only invites consideration of these kinds of geographic, political and cultural borders but also invites consideration of a wider range of borders: the borders between identities, between roles, between disciplines, between concepts, etc. The 2014 conference theme seeks to spur a broad conversation about the borders that unite and divide us, the ways in which these borders are constructed and deconstructed, confirmed and contested. (more…)
The Rhetoric in Society 4 conference is currently underway in Copenhagen. If you are attending the conference and are on Twitter you can post about the conference using the hashtag #RiS4. I’ll then re-tweet them and they’ll appear in the box to the right of this screen, prefixed with an RT.
Twitter back-channels like this are a nice way to keep the discussion going whether or not you happen to be at the conference itself. Hats off to Robert Craig for first use of the hashtag!
The lineup of speakers and sessions for Rhetoric in Society 4 looks very interesting indeed. Here’s hoping the sessions spark as lively a discussion electronically as they no doubt do face-to-face!
*Note: Apologies for RT’s that appear out of order! I’m keeping up as best I can from the wrong end of the time difference.
Rhetoric as Equipment for Living. Kenneth Burke, Culture and Education.
22nd to 25th May 2013
Confirmed keynote speakers
Barry Brummett (University of Texas at Austin – USA)
Steven Mailloux (University of California, Irvine – USA)
Jennifer Richards (Newcastle University – UK)
The second half of the twentieth century has witnessed a number of different but related turns in the humanities and social sciences: linguistic, cultural, anthropological/ ethnographic, interpretive, semiotic, narrative… All these turns recognise the importance of signs and symbols in our interpretations of reality and more specifically the cultural construction of meaning through both language and narrative. The aim of this conference is to introduce rhetoric as a major term for synthesizing all the above-mentioned turns by exploring how rhetoric can make us self-aware about language and culture. We will specifically focus on ‘new rhetoric’, a body of work that sets rhetoric free from its confinement within the traditional fields of education, politics and literature, not by abandoning these fields but by refiguring them. (more…)