The Means of Ignorance: Genuine Dialogue and a Rhetoric of Virtue

Aimed at core problems of contemporary moral rhetoric - pluralistic argument, incommensurable disagreement on ordering terms, and a theoretical move away from essence to relativism - this study is an attempt to restore rhetoric as an art capable of investigating and positing terms of order and being...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Grano, Daniel Anthony
Other Authors: Walter R. Keithly, Jr.
Format: Others
Language:en
Published: LSU 2003
Subjects:
Online Access:http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-0528103-095224/
id ndltd-LSU-oai-etd.lsu.edu-etd-0528103-095224
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-LSU-oai-etd.lsu.edu-etd-0528103-0952242013-01-07T22:48:32Z The Means of Ignorance: Genuine Dialogue and a Rhetoric of Virtue Grano, Daniel Anthony Speech Communication Aimed at core problems of contemporary moral rhetoric - pluralistic argument, incommensurable disagreement on ordering terms, and a theoretical move away from essence to relativism - this study is an attempt to restore rhetoric as an art capable of investigating and positing terms of order and being. This restoration relies upon viewing rhetoric as a practice of epistemic mediation between the experiential and language-based knowledge of the local, and the perfected knowledge of the Absolute. I propose characteristically Socratic notions of contingency and ignorance as the bases for this mediated approach. As a recognition of what is unknown and uncertain in relation to the Absolute, contingency and ignorance promote rhetoric as genuine dialogue, an other-recognizing, inclusive, and open-ended practice carried out in the local but aimed at the Perfect. Genuine dialogue allows agents to relationally enact virtue, collapsing virtue and rhetoric together as a craft or techne. The study is structured as an argument against immanent notions of contingency (in historical and political utopianism and progressivism), and a-discursive notions of ignorance, which are demonstrated to violate basic values of dialogue. Concluding remarks focus on the praxis of contingent, ignorant dialogue as enacted in actual policy settings, as well as focusing on future directions and applications. Walter R. Keithly, Jr. Laura R. Sells Ruth Laurion Bowman Andrew A. King G. Ellis Sandoz, Jr. LSU 2003-05-28 text application/pdf http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-0528103-095224/ http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-0528103-095224/ en unrestricted I hereby grant to LSU or its agents the right to archive and to make available my thesis or dissertation in whole or in part in the University Libraries in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. I retain all proprietary rights, such as patent rights. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis or dissertation.
collection NDLTD
language en
format Others
sources NDLTD
topic Speech Communication
spellingShingle Speech Communication
Grano, Daniel Anthony
The Means of Ignorance: Genuine Dialogue and a Rhetoric of Virtue
description Aimed at core problems of contemporary moral rhetoric - pluralistic argument, incommensurable disagreement on ordering terms, and a theoretical move away from essence to relativism - this study is an attempt to restore rhetoric as an art capable of investigating and positing terms of order and being. This restoration relies upon viewing rhetoric as a practice of epistemic mediation between the experiential and language-based knowledge of the local, and the perfected knowledge of the Absolute. I propose characteristically Socratic notions of contingency and ignorance as the bases for this mediated approach. As a recognition of what is unknown and uncertain in relation to the Absolute, contingency and ignorance promote rhetoric as genuine dialogue, an other-recognizing, inclusive, and open-ended practice carried out in the local but aimed at the Perfect. Genuine dialogue allows agents to relationally enact virtue, collapsing virtue and rhetoric together as a craft or techne. The study is structured as an argument against immanent notions of contingency (in historical and political utopianism and progressivism), and a-discursive notions of ignorance, which are demonstrated to violate basic values of dialogue. Concluding remarks focus on the praxis of contingent, ignorant dialogue as enacted in actual policy settings, as well as focusing on future directions and applications.
author2 Walter R. Keithly, Jr.
author_facet Walter R. Keithly, Jr.
Grano, Daniel Anthony
author Grano, Daniel Anthony
author_sort Grano, Daniel Anthony
title The Means of Ignorance: Genuine Dialogue and a Rhetoric of Virtue
title_short The Means of Ignorance: Genuine Dialogue and a Rhetoric of Virtue
title_full The Means of Ignorance: Genuine Dialogue and a Rhetoric of Virtue
title_fullStr The Means of Ignorance: Genuine Dialogue and a Rhetoric of Virtue
title_full_unstemmed The Means of Ignorance: Genuine Dialogue and a Rhetoric of Virtue
title_sort means of ignorance: genuine dialogue and a rhetoric of virtue
publisher LSU
publishDate 2003
url http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-0528103-095224/
work_keys_str_mv AT granodanielanthony themeansofignorancegenuinedialogueandarhetoricofvirtue
AT granodanielanthony meansofignorancegenuinedialogueandarhetoricofvirtue
_version_ 1716476508197879808