Page 150 - Šolsko polje, XXX, 2019, št. 5-6: Civic, citizenship and rhetorical education in a rapidly changing world, eds. Janja Žmavc and Plamen Mirazchiyski
P. 150
šolsko polje, letnik xxx, številka 5–6
ing them that there are other possibilities and options, that other people
may have different values, may live in a different situation and therefore
represent a different target audience demanding different approach.
If this objective is rather Protagorean in nature, the next one: “Pupils
learn why it is useful to learn rhetoric”, is even more radical, almost Pla-
tonic (in the sense of inciting “wondering” or thaumadzein). First, there is
a definition/goal (ibid., p. 4):
“Pupils understand that rhetoric helps us persuade and understand
in a variety of situations.”
And then there are activities to achieve this goal, going from empir-
ical to abstract (ibid.):
“First, pupils read a few examples from literature aloud (e.g. Tom
Sawyer painting the fence). Then, they try to find (e.g. in the mass media,
literature and in everyday life) examples of arguments for or in favour of
something and against it.”
In the following step, the goal is to understand why it is possible to
talk with conviction in different (and even opposing) ways about the same
thing. And there are three types of activities to achieve this goal, going
from the very empirical to the very abstract (ibid., p. 4):
“- Pupils look at examples of different even diametrically opposed
speeches on the same subject (e.g. sports, music, film, television and
politics).
- Pupils invent examples of different (even opposing) ways of argu-
mentation on everyday family issues: doing the dishes, tidying, etc, and
enact them from their different perspectives.
- Pupils explain why it is (in their opinion) possible to look at the
same things from different perspectives.”
Why is this inductive procedure (pedagogically) important?
First of all, because it teaches pupils how to get from empirical obser-
vation (a) to abstract thinking (c). Second, because it is, again, Protagore-
an in nature: it shows them that there is not just one absolute truth, but
many relative truths, depending on the perspective, on the relation to the
discussed problem (homo mensura > Ἄνϑρωπος μέτρον ἁπάντων). It shows
them that one can look at things from different angles, therefore, differ-
ent onlookers can see the same thing differently, they may notice differ-
ent aspects of the same thing, they may evaluate it differently (depend-
ing on their intellectual, cultural, religious, economic background, or just
the heat of the moment). And becoming conscious of this plurality is also
the beginning of philosophical wondering, thaumazein in Plato’s words:
148
ing them that there are other possibilities and options, that other people
may have different values, may live in a different situation and therefore
represent a different target audience demanding different approach.
If this objective is rather Protagorean in nature, the next one: “Pupils
learn why it is useful to learn rhetoric”, is even more radical, almost Pla-
tonic (in the sense of inciting “wondering” or thaumadzein). First, there is
a definition/goal (ibid., p. 4):
“Pupils understand that rhetoric helps us persuade and understand
in a variety of situations.”
And then there are activities to achieve this goal, going from empir-
ical to abstract (ibid.):
“First, pupils read a few examples from literature aloud (e.g. Tom
Sawyer painting the fence). Then, they try to find (e.g. in the mass media,
literature and in everyday life) examples of arguments for or in favour of
something and against it.”
In the following step, the goal is to understand why it is possible to
talk with conviction in different (and even opposing) ways about the same
thing. And there are three types of activities to achieve this goal, going
from the very empirical to the very abstract (ibid., p. 4):
“- Pupils look at examples of different even diametrically opposed
speeches on the same subject (e.g. sports, music, film, television and
politics).
- Pupils invent examples of different (even opposing) ways of argu-
mentation on everyday family issues: doing the dishes, tidying, etc, and
enact them from their different perspectives.
- Pupils explain why it is (in their opinion) possible to look at the
same things from different perspectives.”
Why is this inductive procedure (pedagogically) important?
First of all, because it teaches pupils how to get from empirical obser-
vation (a) to abstract thinking (c). Second, because it is, again, Protagore-
an in nature: it shows them that there is not just one absolute truth, but
many relative truths, depending on the perspective, on the relation to the
discussed problem (homo mensura > Ἄνϑρωπος μέτρον ἁπάντων). It shows
them that one can look at things from different angles, therefore, differ-
ent onlookers can see the same thing differently, they may notice differ-
ent aspects of the same thing, they may evaluate it differently (depend-
ing on their intellectual, cultural, religious, economic background, or just
the heat of the moment). And becoming conscious of this plurality is also
the beginning of philosophical wondering, thaumazein in Plato’s words:
148
