izpis_h1_title_alt

Retorika, javno razpravljanje in spor o racionalnosti
ID Škerlep, Andrej (Author)

URLURL - Presentation file, Visit http://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-MNZNONOR This link opens in a new window

Abstract
V članku obravnavamo razmerje med retoriko in javnim razpravljanjem prek prikaza Habermasove nesposobnosti, da bi integriral retoriko v svojo teorijo racionalne argumentacije. V sporu med filozofijo in retoriko najprej izpostavljamo polemiko med modernisitčnim racionalizmom in postmodernističnim antiracionalizmom, nato pa v drugem delu članka ta spor obravnavamo še v okviru Platonovega in Aristotelovega pojmovanja retorike. Zastopamo tezo, da je Habermasova nesposobnost integracije retorike šibka točka njegove teorije javnega razpravljanja.

Language:Slovenian
Work type:Not categorized
Typology:1.01 - Original Scientific Article
Organization:FDV - Faculty of Social Sciences
Year:2004
Number of pages:Str. S29-S46
Numbering:Vol. 11, supl.
PID:20.500.12556/RUL-75586 This link opens in a new window
UDC:659.3/.4
ISSN on article:1318-3222
COBISS.SI-ID:23330653 This link opens in a new window
Publication date in RUL:21.12.2015
Views:567
Downloads:116
Metadata:XML RDF-CHPDL DC-XML DC-RDF
:
Copy citation
Share:Bookmark and Share

Record is a part of a journal

Title:Javnost
Shortened title:Javnost
Publisher:Taylor&Francis
ISSN:1318-3222
COBISS.SI-ID:40119808 This link opens in a new window

Secondary language

Language:Unknown
Title:Rhetoric, public discussion and the dispute over rationality
Abstract:
The article confronts Plato's early critical rejection of rhetoric and Aristotle's response to that critique with a positive definition of rhetoric in his philosophical system. In the first part, Plato's critique of rhetoric in a dialogue with Gorgias is presented, which he builds on the opposition between the persuasiveness of rhetoric and true knowledge. He develops the argument that rhetoric manipulates the audience and is, therefore, unethical. The second part of the article focuses on Aristotle's understanding of rhetoric in the context of his system of three categories of human knowledge and in relation to three methods of reasoning. The article sides with Aristotle's claim that because of the contingent nature of public issues and popular audience, rhetorical argumentation cannot fulfil those lofty criteria proposed by Plato. But, according to Aristotle, this does not degrade the status of rhetoric.


Similar documents

Similar works from RUL:
Similar works from other Slovenian collections:

Back