Abstract
This essay notes a resurgence of interest in rhetorical studies on the appeal of form, grounded in the work of rhetorical theorist Kenneth Burke. The essay argues that form is not only a way to structure discourses, it is a way to structure experience. Form is foundational in creating perceptions and thus experiences. Form is also highly rhetorical, in that how we structure our world carries social and ideological implications. The essay thus argues that an understanding of form as foundational and rhetorical should be central to the educational curriculum. This way of understanding form is then a way of making rhetoric central to education in ways surpassing even the efforts of the ancient Greeks and Romans. A rhetorically centered curriculum based on teaching students how to understand form in their lives is empowering and liberating for students at the same time that it instills in them a strong awareness of ethics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Biesta, G. (2009). Good education in an age of measurement: on the need to reconnect with the question of purpose in education. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability (Formerly: Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education), 21(1), 33–46.
Biesta, G. (2012). Becoming world-wise: An educational perspective on the rhetorical curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(6), 815–826.
Brummett, B. (1984). The representative anecdote as a Burkean method, applied to evangelical rhetoric. Southern Communication Journal, 50(1), 1–23.
Brummett, B. (1985). Electric literature as equipment for living: Haunted house films. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 2(2), 247–261.
Brummett, B. (1988). The homology hypothesis: Pornography on the VCR. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 5(2), 202–216.
Brummett, B. (2004). Rhetorical homologies: Form, culture, experience. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
Brummett, B. (2008). A Rhetoric of Style. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Burke, K. (1931). Counter-Statement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Burke, K. (1962). A grammar of motives. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Burke, K. (1973). The philosophy of literary form (3rd ed.). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Cicero, M. T. (1942). De Oratore. (E. W. Sutton, H. Rackham, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Clark, D. L. (1957). Rhetoric in Greco-Roman education. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hebdige, D. (1979). Subculture: The meaning of style. London: Methuen.
McKeon, R. (1987). Rhetoric: Essays in invention and discovery. Woodbridge, CT: Ox Bow Press.
Olson, K. M. (2002). Detecting a common interpretive framework for impersonal violence: The homology in participants’ rhetoric on sport hunting, “hate crimes”, and stranger rape. Southern Communication Journal, 67(2), 215–244.
Richards, I. A. (1936). The philosophy of rhetoric. London: Oxford University Press.
Rutten, K., & Soetaert, R. (2012). Revisiting the rhetorical curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(6), 727–743.
Vico, G. (1984). The new science of Giambattista Vico, unabridged translation of the 3rd edition (1744) with the addition of Practice of the new science. Trans. Bergin. T. G. and Fisch, M. H. New York: Cornell University Press.
Willis, P. (1981). Learning to labor: How working class kids get working class jobs. New York: Columbia University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Brummett, B. Form, Experience and the Centrality of Rhetoric to Pedagogy. Stud Philos Educ 34, 377–384 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-014-9431-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-014-9431-6