Page 107 - Šolsko polje, XXX, 2019, št. 5-6: Civic, citizenship and rhetorical education in a rapidly changing world, eds. Janja Žmavc and Plamen Mirazchiyski
P. 107
f. egglezou ■ debate at the edge of critical pedagogy and rhetorical paideia
a) To what extent debate transforms pedagogical practice in political
praxis (Giroux, 2004, p. 33) in the context of critical pedagogy?
b) Which is the affinity between debate and the cultivation of critical
citizenry? (Burke, 2013).
c) What is the role of rhetorical paideia in general, and of debate in par-
ticular, within the modern educational context for the formation of
active, responsible critical thinkers and democratic citizens?
d) Last but not least: What is the role of educators in the students’ fa-
miliarization with the pedagogical and didactic practice of debate?
In this paper, we will attempt to answer the above questions. First,
a short presentation, of dissoi logoi (the precursor of modern debate) will
occur. Secondly, the main lines that define the theoretical framework of
critical pedagogy within which debate is examined will be presented in
order to form a final conclusion about the value of its use in education-
al practice.
Rhetorical paideia and debate
Since antiquity, within the context of rhetorical paideia, emphasis was
given to the power of speech, as a means of developing the identity of ac-
tive citizens. Practicing the art of speech was considered a valuable sup-
ply for every citizen, who was fueled by the deep desire to acquire knowl-
edge of civic issues and to actively become involved to the shaping of their
era civilization. Among others, knowing the art of speech could help an
individual achieve personal and social fulfillment through the participa-
tion of the formation of a polis that could ensure the human values of arête
and of justice. In other words, we could support the idea that the principal
goal of classical rhetorical paideia was the actualization of critical pedago-
gy’s current demand for forming students who will become active partic-
ipants in social transformation and, at the same time, citizens fully aware
of their developed political qualities (McLaren, 2010, p. 560). Also, for
classical rhetorical paideia, it was commonly accepted that the purpose-
ful use of language by the citizens ought to facilitate their actions con-
cerning the defense of the polis. At the same time, it should not betray the
necessity of an unstoppable critical doubting of these actions (Fontana et
al., 2004).
Easily, we recognize that such a form of education excluded the ap-
proaches of language teaching, which were based on the reproduction of
mere knowledge. As a consequence, the invention of reasons and argu-
ments ought to be contextual according to each rhetorical situation (Bitz-
er, 1968). In other words, language ought to be adapted to the surround-
105
a) To what extent debate transforms pedagogical practice in political
praxis (Giroux, 2004, p. 33) in the context of critical pedagogy?
b) Which is the affinity between debate and the cultivation of critical
citizenry? (Burke, 2013).
c) What is the role of rhetorical paideia in general, and of debate in par-
ticular, within the modern educational context for the formation of
active, responsible critical thinkers and democratic citizens?
d) Last but not least: What is the role of educators in the students’ fa-
miliarization with the pedagogical and didactic practice of debate?
In this paper, we will attempt to answer the above questions. First,
a short presentation, of dissoi logoi (the precursor of modern debate) will
occur. Secondly, the main lines that define the theoretical framework of
critical pedagogy within which debate is examined will be presented in
order to form a final conclusion about the value of its use in education-
al practice.
Rhetorical paideia and debate
Since antiquity, within the context of rhetorical paideia, emphasis was
given to the power of speech, as a means of developing the identity of ac-
tive citizens. Practicing the art of speech was considered a valuable sup-
ply for every citizen, who was fueled by the deep desire to acquire knowl-
edge of civic issues and to actively become involved to the shaping of their
era civilization. Among others, knowing the art of speech could help an
individual achieve personal and social fulfillment through the participa-
tion of the formation of a polis that could ensure the human values of arête
and of justice. In other words, we could support the idea that the principal
goal of classical rhetorical paideia was the actualization of critical pedago-
gy’s current demand for forming students who will become active partic-
ipants in social transformation and, at the same time, citizens fully aware
of their developed political qualities (McLaren, 2010, p. 560). Also, for
classical rhetorical paideia, it was commonly accepted that the purpose-
ful use of language by the citizens ought to facilitate their actions con-
cerning the defense of the polis. At the same time, it should not betray the
necessity of an unstoppable critical doubting of these actions (Fontana et
al., 2004).
Easily, we recognize that such a form of education excluded the ap-
proaches of language teaching, which were based on the reproduction of
mere knowledge. As a consequence, the invention of reasons and argu-
ments ought to be contextual according to each rhetorical situation (Bitz-
er, 1968). In other words, language ought to be adapted to the surround-
105
