Book chapter

A Rhetorical Model of Debating

Stephen M. Llano
St. John’s University, United States


ABOUT THIS CHAPTER

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.
Read more

Keywords: Argumentation Theory, debate, rhetoric

Formats

PDF

Pages: 43-54

Published by: Firenze University Press

Publication year: 2021

DOI: 10.36253/978-88-5518-329-1.05

Download PDF

© 2021 Author(s)
Content licence CC BY 4.0
Metadata licence CC0 1.0

XML

Publication year: 2021

DOI: 10.36253/978-88-5518-329-1.05

Download XML

© 2021 Author(s)
Content licence CC BY 4.0
Metadata licence CC0 1.0

References

  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.

Export citation

Selected format

Usage statistics policy

  • 8Chapter Downloads

Cita come:
Llano, S.; 2021; A Rhetorical Model of Debating. Firenze, Firenze University Press.


Distributori


Indici e aggregatori bibliometrici