Chapter 4 starts out by talking about the stasis approach. This, as you know, is a question that creates a division among people. Then a rhetorical act (argument) is used to mend the fracture.
In chapter 3 we learned that coercion uses a suppression of alternatives to direct peoples thinking, and reach a predetermined end. It goes on to explain how coercion is increasingly disguised as persuasion by creating a division and ultimatums. (the whole “do you believe in God or not”) This will eventually lead you to one conclusion.
It seems like ideas are being built up as fast as they are being torn apart. This explains why there are so many never ending debates on CNN, but does this apply to everyday situation we find ourselves in?
Chapter 3 showed how Bush carefully constructed his speech to get his point across. Then this chapter took it apart to show how it did not really hold up in some areas. I get the impression that we are continually coding and decoding meaning from things we only have the gist of. Relativism is beginning to look more and more plausible. If we can communicate across belief systems why do we need to code and decode?
No comments:
Post a Comment