Friday, September 08, 2006

Rhetoriphobia

Does the intense study of communication turn any attempt at communication into somethin akin to a game, or perhaps a running of a computer program? It is a fear of mine, but I'm absolutely uncertain as to its base in reality. Ramage acknowledges the rather obvious in his book when he writes that conversation is "central to our existence," and that it is "how friends and lovers establish intimacy." The fact that this point is made right in the midst of a study of rhetoric strikes me as alarming. If ones ability to communicate begins to draw heavily on their knowledge of what linguistic techniques are most effective, and how to be most persuasive, then what is done to the possibility of having an authentic conversation? And by authentic I suppose I mean one which is not manipulative. Granted, people use manipulative language and deceit all the time, even without any background in the study of language. I suppose I'm just wondering if such studies make it easier to maniuplate, and in the process, make it more difficult to honestly interact with others. Thoughts?

Also, I'm Aaron. I'm interested in literature, film, music, spending too much time contemplating the most worthwhile ways to spend my time, and "the issues" such as politics, education, culture, and globalization, all of which I know relatively little about, so I'm probably part of the problem.

1 comment:

K. Mahoney said...

I think you're on to a really crucial issue that we will continue to run into all semester...that of "manipulation." Put another way, it's a question of ethics...and a problem of "authenticity." I think we'll see some of these come up as rhetoric/dialectic, Plato/Sophist, democracy/republic.

I guess the way I think about this issue is that when we study language closely, we become more aware of HOW language/discourse/rhetoric affects us...how language can be constructed to persuade/manipulate. Thus, such study also foregounds issues of ethics. That is, persuasion for what? Who is included? Who is seen as the agent of persuasion and who is the target/object of persuasion?

Look forward to continuing the conversations...authentically, that is. :-)