Bibliography on 19th Century Rhetoric, by Janice M. Smith Antczak, Frederick J. The Rhetoric of Democratic Education.
This review originally appeared here at The University Bookman. From this premise, he draws several conclusions: In short, his argument is that Southern conservatives believed their errand was to defend and reanimate a disintegrating past. He sketches the lines of thought connecting the earliest Agrarians to such later Southerners as Weaver and Bradford.
He is so meticulous in his treatment of Southern conservatives that it is surprising the degree to which he neglects the constructive and decent aspects of pragmatism. The result is a series of avoidable errors. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. Each of these men had nuanced interpretations of pragmatism that are difficult to harmonize with each other, let alone view as a bloc against Southern, traditionalist conservatism.
By contrast, pragmatism was an academic enterprise rejected by most Northern intellectuals and completely out of the purview of the average Northern citizen. Pragmatism was nowhere near representative of Northern thinking, especially not in the political or economic realm, and it is hyperbolic to suggest, as Langdale does, that pragmatism influenced the intellectual climate in the North to the extent that traditionalist conservatism influenced the intellectual climate in the South.
Third, the pragmatism of Peirce and James is not about sociopolitical or socioeconomic advancement. It is a methodology, a process of scientific inquiry.
It does not address conservatism per se or liberalism per se.
It can lead one to either conservative or liberal outcomes, although the earliest pragmatists rarely applied it to politics as such.
It is, accordingly, a vehicle to an end, not an end itself. Although James occasionally undertook to discuss political subjects, he did not treat pragmatism as the realization of political fantasy.
They identified with epistemic traditions of Western philosophy but wanted to distill them to their core, knowing full well that humans could not perfect philosophy, only tweak it to become comprehensible and meaningful for a given moment. The effect is disappointing. Both notions of superfluity contemplate the preservation of perennial virtues and literary forms; one, however, condemns pragmatism while the other applauds it.
It is not a term of denunciation as it is usually taken to be. By reenergizing old ideas with creative and exhilarating language, Emerson secured their significance for a new era.
Although it would be wrong to call Emerson a political conservative, he cannot be said to lack a reverence for history. Such idealism flies in the face of Southern traditionalism, which generally abides by the Augustinian doctrine of innate human depravity and the political postures appertaining thereto.
A basic tenet of pragmatism, for instance, is human fallibilism, which is in keeping with the doctrine of innate human depravity and which Peirce numbers as among his reasons for supporting the scientific method. The chief reason for this is the legacy of John Dewey and Richard Rorty, both proud progressives and, nominally at least, pragmatists.
Dewey, behind James, is arguably the most recognizable pragmatist, and it is his reputation, as championed by Rorty, that has done the most to generate negative stereotypes and misplaced generalizations about pragmatism. In fact, the classical pragmatists have much to offer conservatives, and conservatives—even the Southern Agrarians—have supported ideas that are compatible with pragmatism, if not outright pragmatic.
Burkean instrumentalism, committed to gradualism and wary of ideological extremes, is itself a precursor to social forms of pragmatism, although it bears repeating that social theories do not necessarily entail political action. Santayana was plugged into the pragmatist network, having worked alongside James and Josiah Royce, and he authored one of the liveliest expressions of pragmatism ever written: The Life of Reason.
Although Santayana snubbed the label, general consensus maintains that he was a pragmatist. Calhoun, both Southern conservatives, between these pragmatists on his map of conservative thought.
There is, in that respect, an implication that pragmatism complements traditionalism.
It is as though Langdale had hoped to write the conservative, Southern companion to The Metaphysical Club. He does not succeed because his representation of pragmatism is indelibly stamped by the ideas of Rorty, who repackaged pragmatism in postmodern lexica.Emerson’s purpose is to present an alternative style of teaching in order to persuade educators to use the teaching method by using paradoxes, rhetorical questions, and shifts in tone.
He establishes an informative and didactic tone for educators who value attention to detail. a host of ideas about self and identity.
Emerson’s rhetorical practice, the place of sound in his writings has not been adequately addressed, especially as it bears upon his bedrock notion of self- Calhoun, Clay, Lincoln, Sumner, Everett, Douglas, Jefferson Davis, and William Lloyd Garrison.
It is . Browse the Speech Archive A lot of people said a lot of things throughout history. Some of the countless lectures, sermons, talks, discourses, and addresses have been preserved.
A chiasmus is a rhetorical or literary device in which two or more clauses are balanced against each other by the reversal of their structures in order to produce an artistic effect.
Example: “They don’t care about how much you know until they know how much you care.” (Jim Calhoun). Rhetorical Ideas of Emerson and Calhoun.
RHE 2/25/ HW 8 Articles by Emerson and Calhoun Emerson first starts out by highlighting how we come to perceive those who are civilized and those who are not.
He says we do this by negation. In other words, our civility is better defined by showing what we are not. In “Self-Reliance,” Emerson alludes to the voice almost 80 times, mentioning it in over half of the essay’s paragraphs.
Unpacking these references, one finds an implicit rhetorical theory of sound and voice drawn from assumptions of nineteenth-century Americans’ conceptions of sound.