Contenuto in:
Capitolo

A Rhetorical Model of Debating

  • Stephen M. Llano

A rhetorical model of the debate centered on the image of a labyrinth is more suitable than the metaphor of debate-as-game in describing the benefits of arguing in front of an audience. The labyrinth best expresses that proceeding by successive choices, coming and going, and sometimes retracing one's steps, typical of the debate activity. The basic thesis is that arguing is a continuous adaptation of one's speeches according to the audience that listens. In fact, in the labyrinth, what matters is not only arriving at the outcome - the exit or reaching the center of the structure - but the path you choose to get there is equally important. More than the definitive and winning argument, which rarely occurs in discussions, the labyrinth teaches us to recognise the plurality of approaches adopted when faced with an issue.

  • Keywords:
  • Argumentation Theory,
  • debate,
  • rhetoric,
+ Mostra di più

Stephen M. Llano

St. John’s University, United States

  1. Bitzer, L. F. 1968. “The Rhetorical Situation.” Philosophy & Rhetoric 1: 1-14.
  2. Burke, K. 1969. A Grammar of Motives. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
  3. Ehninger, D., and W. Brockriede (1971). Decision by debate (1st Ed). New York: Harper & Row.
  4. Keith, W. M. 2007. Democracy as Discussion: Civic Education and the American Forum Movement. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
  5. Mercier, H., and D. Sperber. 2017. The Enigma of Reason. Cambridge-Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  6. O’Neill, J. M. 1915a. “A Disconcerted Editor and Others.” Quarterly Journal of Public Speaking 1(1): 79-84.
  7. O’Neill, J. M. 1915b. “Able Non-Debaters.” Quarterly Journal of Public Speaking 2(1): 197-207.
  8. Potter, D. 1944. Debating in the Colonial Chartered Colleges. New York: Teacher’s College of Columbia University.
  9. Poulakos, J. 1995. Sophistical Rhetoric in Classical Greece. SC: University of South Carolina Press Columbia.
  10. Ranciere, J. 1991. The Ignorant Schoolmaster. CA: Stanford University Press, Stanford.
  11. Ray, A. G. 2004. “The Permeable Public: Rituals of Citizenship in Antebellum Men’s Debating Clubs.” Argumentation & Advocacy 41(1): 1-16.
  12. Sprague, R. K. 1972. The Older Sophists. Inc, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Co.
  13. Tannen, D. 1998. The Argument Culture: Stopping America’s War of Words. New York: Ballantine Books.
  14. Vatz, R. E. 1973. “The Myth of the Rhetorical Situation.” Philosophy & Rhetoric 3(6): 154-61.
  15. Walker, J. 2011. The Genuine Teachers of This Art: Rhetorical Education in Antiquity. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
PDF
  • Anno di pubblicazione: 2021
  • Pagine: 43-54

XML
  • Anno di pubblicazione: 2021

Informazioni sul capitolo

Titolo del capitolo

A Rhetorical Model of Debating

Autori

Stephen M. Llano

Lingua

English

DOI

10.36253/978-88-5518-329-1.05

Opera sottoposta a peer review

Anno di pubblicazione

2021

Copyright

© 2021 Author(s)

Licenza d'uso

CC BY 4.0

Licenza dei metadati

CC0 1.0

Informazioni bibliografiche

Titolo del libro

Competing, cooperating, deciding: towards a model of deliberative debate

Curatori

Adelino Cattani, Bruno Mastroianni

Opera sottoposta a peer review

Numero di pagine

168

Anno di pubblicazione

2021

Copyright

© 2021 Author(s)

Licenza d'uso

CC BY 4.0

Licenza dei metadati

CC0 1.0

Editore

Firenze University Press

DOI

10.36253/978-88-5518-329-1

ISBN Print

978-88-5518-328-4

eISBN (pdf)

978-88-5518-329-1

Collana

Communication and Philosophical Cultures. Researches and Instruments

ISSN della collana

2975-1152

e-ISSN della collana

2975-1233

414

Download dei libri

299

Visualizzazioni

Salva la citazione

1.383

Libri in accesso aperto

in catalogo

2.567

Capitoli di Libri

4.133.292

Download dei libri

4.947

Autori

da 1047 Istituzioni e centri di ricerca

di 66 Nazioni

69

scientific boards

da 368 Istituzioni e centri di ricerca

di 43 Nazioni

1.300

I referee

da 393 Istituzioni e centri di ricerca

di 38 Nazioni