Boxing Plato’s Shadow: An Introduction to the Study of Human Communication
Michael Dues and Mary Brown
Chapter 2: Communication Study from Aristotle’s Time to the Twentieth Century
Rhetoric in Egypt & Rome
Why do you think rhetoric was “not a vital subject of study in Ptolemy’s Egypt”? (16)

Can you draw some implications from that?
What do you think of Averroes’ understanding of “various types of audiences? (16)
How did the Roman form of government (i.e., a republic) influence the practice of
rhetoric? (17)
According to Cicero, what are the orator’s three practical objectives? (17)
According to Quintilian, what was essential for someone to be a great orator? (17)

What do you think of that?
Rhetoric in Christian Europe
How did Augustine’s views on ‘truth’ affect his sense/characterization of rhetoric? (18)
Contribution of the Moors
Toledo library - Preservation of texts (e.g., Aristotle’s) (19)
Do you agree with Averroes that there are two types of knowledge, worldly and spiritual?
(20)
Christian scholars “lived in an autocratic world, where both spiritual and secular truths
were decreed based on claims of divine authority. In such a world, rhetoric was relevant
only for disseminating known truths and guiding the ignorant.” (20)

What are the implications of living in such a world? Is it relevant for us at all?
Alcuin (8th century) – the New Rhetoric – “focused on finding effective arguments as
well as adapting speeches to specific audiences (20)
John Scotus (9th century) – use of rhetoric to understand (i.e., interpret) meaning of texts
(20)
Maimonides (12th century) – wanted to introduce reason into theology, but like Aristotle,
saw rhetoric as “useful primarily for teaching the truths to weak-minded audiences” (21)
Humanism, the Renaissance, and the Printing Press
Renaissance scholars tended to divide reality between the material and the immaterial and
had a “penchant for dividing and categorizing subjects . . . .” (21)
E.g., Peter Ramus – recall the five canons? Split these – invention & disposition were
associated w/ dialectic (philosophy) but rhetoric was left w/ only style, memory, and
delivery (21) – language style, figures of speech, ornamental

How similar to what is current today, say, in the curriculum at Clarkson
University?
How did the ideas of Erasmus (16th century) and
Vico (18th century) oppose Ramus’? (22)
What was the effect of Gutenberg’s technology on memory, the fourth of rhetoric’s five
‘canons’? (22)
 Has the internet encouraged any similar effects?

“Because they could reach wide audiences across both time and distance, written
words became more powerful than spoken words and were seen as more
important. The combination of the Renaissance and the printing press thus
generated a new ideal for perfect communication, which was the exact opposite of
Socrates’ ancient ideal of perfect one-to-one personal communication.” (23)
The Enlightenment and the Modern Concept of Communication
Francis Bacon – “proposed a scientific approach” for the study of human communication,
suggesting the scientific study of gestures (23)
Picked up by John Bulwer – nonverbal expression of thoughts and feelings (23)
What do you think about John Locke’s sense of communication?

“He observed that words serve as signs by which the ‘thoughts of men’s minds’
are ‘conveyed to one another’ and that speakers and listeners must share the same
ideas about the meanings of signs for communication to serve its purpose.” (24)
 What would Schneider say about that?
New Relevance for Rhetoric in England and the New World
19th century England – relatively democratic, provided fertile ground for resurgence in
rhetorical study, theory and practice (24)
Campbell, Blair, and Whately (24++)

“Together their works restored the study of rhetoric to its full Aristotelian scope;
blended rhetorical theory with psychology, logic, and aesthetics; and moved
toward nesting rhetoric within the broader subject of human communication.”
(25)
Campbell – countered Ramus’ separation // “included the canons of invention and
disposition, restoring rhetoric’s original scope. He said the purposes of rhetoric are to
‘enlighten the understanding, to awaken the memory, to engage the imagination, to
arouse the passions to influence the will to action or belief” (25)
Blair – Good taste important // “argued that ultimately it is emotion, not reason, that
drives human action” (25)
Whately – countered Plato – saw logic as a tool of rhetoric (25)

What might be the implications of this hierarchical reversal? 
19th century American universities – rhetoric an important element in the curriculum (25)
 No longer?
Elocution
How do the authors suggest that the Industrial Revolution and the rise of middle class
affected interest in the study of communication? (26)
Sheridan, Austin (26-27)
Henry Ward - My Fair Lady (27)

Notice the ‘impending’ split between written rhetoric (taught in departments of
English in American colleges & universities) vs. oral rhetoric, i.e. elocution,
(some profs, but just as likely private instructors) (27-28)
A Changing Academic World and the Birth of a New Discipline
What happened to the organization of universities between 1860-1915? And why
should you care to know about it?  (28-29)
English departments vs. speech departments – different scholarly interests emerged (29)
Key date: 1910 – “They would build their twentieth-century discipline on the foundation
of classical rhetoric and justify it for its practical relevance for citizenship in a democratic
society.” (29)
Figure 1 – timeline / key figures (30)
Chapter 3: Humanistic Study of Communication in the Twentieth Century
What is an ‘academic discipline’? How is one created? (33-34)
1) “the content must represent a substantial and discrete subject area that is not
covered by any other discipline” (34)
2) “the discipline must have a methodology of its own – that is, an accepted set of
systematic methods for developing new knowledge about its subject” (34)

So what’s the problem for communication?
Think about this sentence:
“Thus, they [communication scholars & teachers] faced the difficult task of
carving out places for themselves in already established university structures.”
(35)
All kinds of problems (35), but also some “powerful advantages”?

Enormous practical value and deep roots (re: academic tradition) (35)
A “practical art”? (35)

What does that mean?
1915 – Speech Association of America (36)
Cornell School – Winans, Hunt, et al. “. . . built their study and a coherent curriculum on
a foundation of classical rhetorical theory, primarily upon the work of Aristotle . . . [and]
adopted the sophists’ goal of teaching arête, aiming to provide students with the
communication skills they needed to function as effective citizens in both public and
private life.” (37)
 Isn’t arête a dual-major at Clarkson? Are there
some Arête majors in this class?
The “tools of democracy” (37) – placed this ‘strand’ (?) in the humanist tradition

“Recall that humanism grew from a rediscovery of classical Greek and
Roman thought during the Renaissance and that classical rhetoric,
philosophy, history and art were valued as methods of learning that
contributed to human freedom in making enlightened choices.” (37)
“Humanistic scholars seek to gain knowledge by studying individual cases, not by
making generalizations across many individuals.” (37)
Is that different than what we usually think of
(‘define’) as “knowledge”?
“Humans are free to make conscious choices, and enlightened free will is the very
essence of humanity.” (38)
Note Wichlen’s difference between literary critic and rhetorical critic? (38)

Universal truths vs. specific audiences in specific time, place, context (38)
Neo-Aristotelians – “The central questions these scholars sought to answer were drawn
from Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric, ‘the art of discovering all the available means of
persuasion in a given situation.’ Assuming with Aristotle that a speech is an intentional
effort to bring about a change in a specific audience, for a specific purpose in a specific
time, place, and context, they sought to understand how speakers adapt to all the specific
conditions and use specific means of persuasion to achieve their purposes.” (39)
Limitations? Their methodology privileged public speeches (40)
Yeah, so what? 
“The Neo-Aristotelian approach led rhetorical scholars to think in terms of
simple, cause-effect relationships in which speakers caused intended changes in
audiences by making speeches.” (40)
What were the key arguments/points in Edwin Black’s book, Rhetorical Criticism: A
Study in Method (40+)?
1) speeches only represent a tiny portion of rhetorical/human communication;
2) to determine effectiveness, social science offers better methods;
3) effectiveness not the only way to evaluate a speech (e.g., Coatesville, PA speech;
also mention Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address?)
Helped spark increase of social scientific study of communication processes, mass media,
and interpersonal communication (41)
What’s the ‘legacy’ of the Neo-Aristotelians? (42)
New Foundations for Contemporary Rhetorical Scholarship (42++)
Argumentation theory –

Toulmin – wanted to focus on how everyday decisions are made, so his focus is
not on ‘prescribing’ how arguments should/might be made, but rather ‘describing’
how people actually do argue (43)
Data
Claim
Warrant (43)
o How was Toulmin’s book, The Uses of Argument, received in England?
(43)

Perelman – and Olbrechts-Tyteca – contrasts demonstration (‘a calculation
made in accordance with rules’) with argumentation (“a matter of
communication techniques that ‘induce or increase the mind’s adherence to the
theses presented for its assent’”) (44)
“Demonstration begins from facts or rules, whereas argumentation begins from
premises its audience accepts. Demonstration leads to self-evident or certain
conclusions, whereas argumentation leads to conclusions that are ‘more or less
strong, more or less convincing’ . . . .” (44)
Hermeneutics
Quite an old ‘methodology’ – used by biblical scholars, e.g., 19th century Europe

Kant – beauty & taste – aesthetic judgments subjective (45)

Leibniz – no “stance from which to observe universal Truth” (45) // “stance” a
key notion – i.e., perspective

Dilthey – must dispense with all dogma & rules (i.e., preconceptions?) to achieve
true hermeneutic understanding (45)
“These thinkers pointed out that, although ‘truth’ may exist in a general
objective sense, the realities with which people actually live are ‘meanings.’
Meanings are perceived, interpreted ‘truths,’ and are always assigned by
individuals and cultures, and they are always influenced by context. The idea
that people do not experience reality, but only ‘truths’ filtered through
interpretation and assignment of ‘meaning,’ was an important breakthrough
in human understanding.” (45)


Social constructionists (45)
I. A. Richards – interested in how people understand and misunderstand messages
(45)
“. . . he proposed that, although meaning is conveyed through words, which are
imperfect symbols of the things they represent in the world, meaning occurs not
in words themselves but in people’s thoughts.” (45)
►
Think about that.
Dramatism




KB – a college dropout! 
Identification – examples?
o Rhetoric – “ ‘the use of words by human agents to form attitudes or induce
actions in other human agents’” (46) // it’s “an essential function of
language” . . . “to induce ‘cooperation in beings that by nature respond to
symbols’”
Motion vs. Action? (46)
Pentad // ratios (46)
o Act
o Agent
o Agency
o Scene
o Purpose
Critical Theory





Habermas – concerned with rational communicative action (47)
“Critical theorists believe that the methods of quantitative science are not suitable
to address the critical issues of value in a society.” (47)
3 domains of human knowledge (47)
o Work – empirical science provides form of reasoning to gain technical
conclusions
o Language – historical scholarship & hermeneutics
o Power – self-reflection through critical theory
Humans should be as free as possible & any unnecessary domination is irrational.
(47)
For Habermas, “the fundamental purpose of rhetorical criticism is liberation, and
the primary purpose for understanding persuasion is to defend oneself against it.”
(48)
Postmodernism

Term originated in architecture to contrast w/ ‘drab’ modernist style (48)

Postmodernists suspicious of social scientific approach (48)

Life is ‘fragmented,’ differing cultures lead to different systems of “‘truth’” (48)

Science’s claim to produce universal Truth is “bogus” (48)
o Anyone want to claim otherwise? Think about it.

Foucault – “fundamental power in any culture is wielded through control of the
rules of communication” (48)

Lyotard – “focused attention on the fact that our perception of reality is organized
through our language and that language (and therefore perceptions of reality)
varies by culture. . . . Lyotard explained that what we regard as ‘knowledge’
always has a ‘sponsor,’ such as the church, a state, or a professional authority
group. Sponsors, he pointed out, always have their own interests to serve. . . .”
(48)
o Think hard about this concept of “sponsors”? See if you can connect
it to anything in your life?

Derrida – deconstruction / when something ‘included’ something else is
‘excluded’ // ‘yes’ also implicitly means ‘no’ to something else. (48-49)
o Can you think of some examples of how that might be true?

“Some rhetorical scholars have thoroughly embraced this view. Agreeing with
Derrida that only though language can humans ‘know’ in the sense of recognizing
the meaning of something, these scholars suggest that humans constantly work
towards ‘intersubjective’ agreement about what they will consider ‘true’ and that
this process is rhetorical.” (49)

Others reject this – what happens to the concept of ‘objective knowledge’ then?
(49)
Epistemics

Reaction to Plato again – recall his ‘limited’ view of rhetoric’s value? “. . . a role
in which it might be used by philosophers to help convey truths to less intelligent
audiences.” (49)

Rhetorical scholars returned to Aristotle’s claim that “rhetoric is a means of
discovering probable truth when certainty is unattainable. Beyond this, they
argued, rhetoric is the means by which people literally construct social truths.”
(49)

Robert L. Scott (1967 article) – “. . . humans ‘cannot be certain but must act in the
face of uncertainty.’ Scott argued that people speak and act before they know and
that it is by speaking and acting that humans come to know. Thus, he suggested,
rhetoric is a ‘way of knowing; it is epistemic.’” (50)
Rhetorical Scholarship Today

Movement studies (50)

Rhetorical Situation / Lloyd Bitzer (50)

Ernest Bormann / fantasy theme analysis – to identify the persuasive messages
embedded in the themes of narratives // theory of symbolic convergence – bridges
humanistic & social science perspectives (50-51)

Jamieson & Campbell / genre (e.g., campaign speeches) (51)
o “A critic who understands the recurring elements that are typically present
in a genre can better recognize what is unique and creative in a specific
message within that genre and can assess how well a speaker has adapted
to the audience and the situation to achieve his or her purpose.” (51)

Fisher – “offered what he called the narrative paradigm, suggesting that stories
incorporate all the rationality of traditional argument, as well as evoke listener’s
values . . . Fisher’s work provided the conceptual framework for a method of
critically analyzing narratives by focusing on the events, characters, settings, and
themes” (51) / coherence – Does it hang together? Does it ring true for listener?

Some truths are “‘social truths’ literally created and maintained by rhetoric.” (51)
“What contemporary rhetorical scholars share with their early twentieth-century
counterparts is the recognition that the communication affects virtually every aspect of
human life and that the abilities to understand and accomplish communication are indeed
practical arts. What they share with the humanist tradition is an appreciation of the
complexity and importance of language in life and the ideal of helping people function as
free, choice-making individuals.” (52)

Contemporary rhetorical scholars don’t have a single methodological
approach – they aren’t trying to “do science”. Instead, it’s praxis, “the
competent and skilled practice of a specialized, practical art. (52)
►
What’s an “art”?