Abstract
Many selective portraits of a human being have been produced. Calvin O. Schrag and Walter R. Fisher have listed the following examples:
homo sociologicus homo politicus homo faber homo ecclesiasticus homo loquens homo ludens psychological man homo oeconomicus homo narrans symbol-using animal homo sapiens rational man1
Interpreting “persons” raises the ontological question of the nature of being human. Seeing them as relatively simple creates a caricature focusing on one characteristic and reducing others to oblivion or a blur. Even if one construes people as interestingly complex, some choice of emphasis is required. Schrag, who clearly is not a caricaturist, pointed out, “Selection is simply an implication of the finitude of human knowledge,” and he argued that a “social scientist is required to select for investigation … a partitive profile of the life-world” of people and their “meaning-imbued activities.”2
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Radical Reflection and the Origin of the Human Sciences (West Lafayette, Ind.: Purdue University Press, 1980), p. 66; and ‘Narration as a Human Communication Paradigm: The Case of Public Moral Argument,’ Communication Monographs 51 (March 1984), 6.
Schrag, p. 65.
Fisher, 6.
For a more comprehensive development of the idea of perspectivism, see Wayne Brockriede, Constructs, Experience, and Argument, Quarterly Journal of Speech 71 (May 1985), 151–163.
‘The Claims of Immediacy,’ in Philosophy, Rhetoric and Argumentation, ed. Maurice Natanson and Henry W. Johnstone, Jr. (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1900), p. 00.
‘The Claims of Immediacy,’ p. 19.
‘Some Reflections on Argumentation,’ in Philosophy, Rhetoric and Argumentation, ed. Maurice Natanson and Henry Johnstone, Jr. (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1965), p. 10.
La Nouvelle Rhétorique: Traité de l’Argumentation (Paris: Presses Universitaires des France, 1958), later translated into English by John Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver under the title of The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation (Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1969).
See, for example, Robert L. Scott, ‘On Viewing Rhetoric as Epistemic,’ Central States Speech Journal 18 (February 1967), 9–17; and Michael C. Leff, ‘In Search of Ariadne’s Thread: A Review of the Recent Literature on Rhetorical Theory,’ Central States Speech Journal 19 (Summer 1978), 73-91.
‘Argument as Method: Its Nature, Its Limitations, and Its Uses,’ Speech Monographs 37 (June 1970), 104.
Wayne Brockriede, ‘Arguers as Lovers,’ Philosophy & Rhetoric 5 (Winter 1972), 5.
Johnstone, p. 1.
Natanson, p. 15.
Johnstone, p. 6.
Ehninger, 105.
Johnstone, p. 5.
‘Two Concepts of Argument,’ Journal of the American Forensic Association 13 (Winter 1977), 121–128.
‘The Process of Debate,’ in Douglas Ehninger and Wayne Brockriede, Decision by Debate, 2nd ed. (New York: Harper and Row, 1978), pp. 13–17.
Jürgen Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action. Volume One: Reason and the Rationalization of Society, trans. Thomas McCarthy (Boston: Beacon Press, 1984), p. 42. See also Joseph W. Wenzel, ‘Jürgen Habermas and the Dialectical Perspective on Argumentation,’ Journal of the American Forensic Association 16 (Fall 1979), 86; and Brant R. Burleson and Susan L. Kline, ‘Habermas’ Theory of Communication: A Critical Explication,’ Quarterly Journal of Speech 65 (December 1979), 418-421.
Natanson, pp. 10-11.
Johnstone, p. 4.
Ehninger, ‘Argument as Method,’ 102.
Ehninger, ‘Argument as Method,’ p. 102.
Brockriede, ‘Arguers as Lovers,’ 5.
Henry W. Johnstone, Jr., ‘Toward an Ethics of Rhetoric’ (unpublished paper, Speech Communication Association, 1979), p. 8.
Henry W. Johnstone, Jr., ‘Persuasion and Validity in Philosophy,’ in Natanson and Johnstone, p. 141.
‘Wahrheitstheorien,’ in Wirklichkeit und Reflexion, ed. H. Fahrenbach (Pfullingen, 1973), in an unpublished translation by Richard Grabau under the title of ‘Theories of Truth’ (West Lafayette, Ind.: Purdue University, 1976), p. 33.
‘Wahrheitstheorien.’ See Note 27.
‘Toward a Theory of Communicative Competence,’ Inquiry 13 (Winter 1970), 371.
Ethics in Human Communication (Columbus, Ohio: Charles Merrill, 1975), pp. 45–46.
‘The Contribution of Habermas to Rhetorical Validity,’ Journal of the American Forensic Association 16 (Fall 1979), 106.
Jürgen Habermas, Communication and the Evolution of Society, trans. Thomas McCarthy (Boston: Beacon Press, 1979), pp. 1–68. His position on “universal pragmatics” is summarized neatly in a chart on p. 68.
Personal Knowledge (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958).
Human Understanding (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972), especially pp. 495–500.
See, for example, Herbert W. Simons, ‘Chronicle and Critique of a Conference,’ Quarterly Journal of Speech 71 (February 1985), 52–64; and John Lyne, ‘Rhetorics of Inquiry,’ Quarterly Journal of Speech 71 (February 1985), 65-73.
‘On the Foundations of Rationality: Toulmin, Habermas and the A Priori of Reason,’ Journal of the American Forensic Association 16 (Fall 1979), 127.
Toulmin, p. 503.
‘The Substance of Rhetoric: Good Reasons,’ Quarterly Journal of Speech 49 (October 1963), 239–249; Modern Dogma and the Rhetoric of Assent (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), pp. 143-192; and Walter R. Fisher, ‘Toward a Logic of Good Reasons,’ Quarterly Journal of Speech 64 (December 1978), 376-384.
‘The Rational and the Reasonable,’ in Perelman’s The New Rhetoric and the Humanities (Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel, 1979), p. 120.
‘Theories of Truth,’ pp. 6–7.
Theories of Truth; p. 22.
‘The New Rhetoric,’ in The New Rhetoric and the Humanities, p. 14.
This theme is developed by Walter R. Fisher in an essay included in this volume.
Habermas, ‘Toward a Theory of Communicative Competence,’ p. 371.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1986 D. Reidel Publishing Company
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Brockriede, W. (1986). Arguing: The Art of Being Human. In: Golden, J.L., Pilotta, J.J. (eds) Practical Reasoning in Human Affairs. Synthese Library, vol 183. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4674-3_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4674-3_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-8578-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-4674-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive