Page 132 - Šolsko polje, XXX, 2019, št. 5-6: Civic, citizenship and rhetorical education in a rapidly changing world, eds. Janja Žmavc and Plamen Mirazchiyski
P. 132
šolsko polje, letnik xxx, številka 5–6
- the pragmatics of the rhetorical message: intentionality and
structuring;
- the variance of the message: translation from situation to situa-
tion, from code to code;
- the analysis of the effect.
8. Communication built on rhetorical intelligence is vital to the de-
bates and co-operations that creatively nurture communities. It is
also fundamental to a type of coexistence that supports socialisa-
tion, to a type of understanding that ensures the continuity of cul-
ture and the processes of remembering and renewal. (Aczél, 2015)
Three phases of teaching rhetoric
One of the main challenges of teaching rhetoric as the creative study of
(strategic) social behaviour is whether we can reconfigure the educational
program so that it could assume the process-approach rather than remain
focused on the product or procedure. In other words, we are to decide if
we can accept that the communicative-pragmatic sensitivity and behav-
iour which manifest itself in speaking constitute a much better measure
of rhetorical proficiency than individual speech artifacts.
If we do, then invention has to be reclaimed for rhetoric from Petrus
Ramus, and rhetoric education should be started with the development
of critical thinking and rhetorical analysis. Only then can we create and
shape the rhetorical space attached to context and situation, to be followed
by the instruction and practice of debate as a form of behaviour in dialog-
ical communication. These three phases can also be grasped through the
conceptual triad of (1) analysis, (2) creation and (3) encounter. In this way,
first, we teach students open, exploratory inquiry, systematic analysis, and
the bold formulation of statements; second, the creative-productive pro-
cesses of articulation, expression and speaking; and third, we develop the
skills required to participate in encounters that emerge in conflicts and
disagreements, which can induce changes.
Critical thinking and analysis
The aim of the first phase of the process is to clarify the nature of issues,
topics and stances, and to develop critical thinking (Bowell and Kemp,
2002) and analysis. The analytical method used in encouraging critical
thinking is critical rhetoric, which is also an important procedure in re-
search-centred education. The basic principle of this method is seeing hu-
mans as the creators of rhetoric, language as the medium for rhetoric and
communication as the purpose of rhetoric respectively (Black, 1978; Foss,
130
- the pragmatics of the rhetorical message: intentionality and
structuring;
- the variance of the message: translation from situation to situa-
tion, from code to code;
- the analysis of the effect.
8. Communication built on rhetorical intelligence is vital to the de-
bates and co-operations that creatively nurture communities. It is
also fundamental to a type of coexistence that supports socialisa-
tion, to a type of understanding that ensures the continuity of cul-
ture and the processes of remembering and renewal. (Aczél, 2015)
Three phases of teaching rhetoric
One of the main challenges of teaching rhetoric as the creative study of
(strategic) social behaviour is whether we can reconfigure the educational
program so that it could assume the process-approach rather than remain
focused on the product or procedure. In other words, we are to decide if
we can accept that the communicative-pragmatic sensitivity and behav-
iour which manifest itself in speaking constitute a much better measure
of rhetorical proficiency than individual speech artifacts.
If we do, then invention has to be reclaimed for rhetoric from Petrus
Ramus, and rhetoric education should be started with the development
of critical thinking and rhetorical analysis. Only then can we create and
shape the rhetorical space attached to context and situation, to be followed
by the instruction and practice of debate as a form of behaviour in dialog-
ical communication. These three phases can also be grasped through the
conceptual triad of (1) analysis, (2) creation and (3) encounter. In this way,
first, we teach students open, exploratory inquiry, systematic analysis, and
the bold formulation of statements; second, the creative-productive pro-
cesses of articulation, expression and speaking; and third, we develop the
skills required to participate in encounters that emerge in conflicts and
disagreements, which can induce changes.
Critical thinking and analysis
The aim of the first phase of the process is to clarify the nature of issues,
topics and stances, and to develop critical thinking (Bowell and Kemp,
2002) and analysis. The analytical method used in encouraging critical
thinking is critical rhetoric, which is also an important procedure in re-
search-centred education. The basic principle of this method is seeing hu-
mans as the creators of rhetoric, language as the medium for rhetoric and
communication as the purpose of rhetoric respectively (Black, 1978; Foss,
130
