Argument as Issue Campaigns allows inquiry into its metaphorical constructs and practices, as well as argument itself and issue campaigns. Study into such a metaphor demonstrates that argument can be inquiry, it can be intertextual, it is rarely a black and white issue, it is layered, it has exigencies and constraints, it is something that when placed into dichotomous and binary frameworks becomes overly simplistic and ultimately problematic. The campaign ads that aired during the WI Walker Proposal debate highlight how not only do they function as larger rhetorical texts, but they have micro texts within them that work to construct metaphors and layers of reinforcing texts aiming to strengthen messages. Additionally, by examining different sponsors of campaign advertisements Argument as Issue Campaigns highlight the role of interests in argument, in campaigns, and in rhetorical metaphors.
Showing posts with label argumentation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label argumentation. Show all posts
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Thursday, April 21, 2011
The ‘Contact Zone’
The Wisconsin union campaign to preserve collective bargaining rights is an example of a contact zone. It is a place where arguments and issue campaigns become Argument as Issue Campaigns, it is a place where people need to be heard and where people need to listen for there to be the potential for transformation.
“To be heard is power. But to hear-to really hear- is to be transformed” (1).
In an effort to be heard, and in reaction to being transformed by what they were hearing and experiencing at their expense, Union workers and supporters, engaged in campaign practices such as political advertisements which attempted to send messages both to Walker and his political and civic supporters, as well as others (including, but not limited to, civil and political union supporters).
For example, in an ad produced by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and Democracy for America Kathleen Slamka, an electrician from WI , stated that what was going in WI “is republican class warfare, an attack on the middle class, this is a battle we need to win” (Kathleen Slamka, an electrician from WI who spoke out).
Richard Scoby also stated in the ad, that his presence as a protester was “not selfish, its just survival”.
In moments where people's livelihoods are threatened, the "contact zone" which is partially seen in this ad, becomes increasingly important. The "contact zone" needs to be entered by those to which this ad is appealing to: those on the other side of the campaign, those who distance themselves from the campaign, those who want to be invisible, those who stand on the margins, those who are being spoken for, those who may not realize their interconnectedness to the issues being raised, etc.
Exploring the "contact zone" through the metaphor of Argument as Issue Campaigns invites us to expand our understandings, to set thoughts of solipsism aside, to engage listening practices, to engage speaking practices, and to imagine a place where limits are transformed, and imagine a place where potentials can emerge.
What is most challenging about this space, these conceptions, is that the symbolic practices of rhetoric, of argument, are real. The issues are real. The people are real. Their interests are real. This is a space where competing interests meet, where ideologies clash, where values clash, where rhetoric is material as well as symbolic, and where without willingness to listen, without compassion and appreciation for the other- solutions may be found at the expense of others. It is ultimately a place of discomfort.
It is no wonder that those with significant power over others may chose to avoid this space and move forward without discomfort, and with confidence that they are acting in the best interests of those with whom they are speaking for, and without listening to. But, in those rare moments, when humility is embraced, when people stop and listen, it is in these moments, that transformation can occur. But, how often in Argument as Issue Campaigns are participants willing to engage the "contact zone"? And who is it that is most interested in the "contact zone"?
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Argument as Issue Campaign
As a scholar of argumentation and rhetoric who focuses on issue campaigns it seems appropriate to think about the metaphor Argument as Issue Campaign. As mentioned in a previous post metaphors allow new conceptual constructions and understandings. Thus, argument as its own construct becomes something new and different within the metaphor Argument as Issue Campaign.
Arguments are typically understood, within Toulmin's framework, as ways "of presenting conclusions that have been discovered prior to the argument" (Kastely, 1999, p. 227). Unfortunately, this typical practice of argument doesn't always acknowledge contradictions and can lock oneself into a system of explanation that is impervious to criticism (Kastely, 1999). But, this is not the only understanding of argument, there are many. One other way to understand argument is through deliberative and/or dialectical argument. Both are centered around a more collaborative understanding of argument that is interested in the other members of argument and debate as well as their ideas and contribution to the topic at hand. It is not based in a win/lose binary, but more associated with both/and thinking that requires vulnerability to the idea of being influenced and shifting of thoughts, as well as finding commonalities that can lead to cooperative solutions and/or paths (Kastely, 1999).
Issue campaigns, are campaigns that deal with issues, such as: policy issues and ballot initiatives. These campaigns are typically performed at many different sites, for example: in policy rhetoric, in political ads, speech rally's, protest rally's, on the bodies of those engaged in the campaign(s), in press releases, on websites, in canvassing efforts, in PR, etc etc.
After a quick review of what is argument and what is issue campaign we can begin the exploration of the metaphor Argument as Issue Campaign. To think of Argument as Issue Campaign invites us to expand our conception of each individual construct and think of them as a combination, in relationship, as a new idea and understanding, as a new mode of perception (Blumenberg, 1960), and as a mode of thought (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980).
This metaphor invites us to think argument as not only a verbal speech act, but also as something nonverbal, and even visual, marked on bodies, disseminated to masses, interpersonal canvassing, fundraising, as lies, misinformation, fact based claims, value based claims, policy based claims, organizing, viral, technology, statist, punditry, satire, and parody....just to name a few.
Although this is a preliminary inquiry into Argument as Issue Campaign I hope that it will spawn some ideas about how to think of argument as a metaphor, how to think of this particular metaphor, and how to think of argument differently. I invite you to marinate on this with me for awhile, so that when I return we can add more to this. Additionally, I want to think of this metaphor through a rhetorical case study of the Wisconsin Union Issue Campaigns (for and against WI unions rights to collective bargaining). Thoughts?
Blumenberg, H. (1960). Paradigmen zu einer meaphorologie.
Kastely, J. L. (1999). From formalism to inquiry: A model of argument in Antigone. College English, 62(2).
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By.
Arguments are typically understood, within Toulmin's framework, as ways "of presenting conclusions that have been discovered prior to the argument" (Kastely, 1999, p. 227). Unfortunately, this typical practice of argument doesn't always acknowledge contradictions and can lock oneself into a system of explanation that is impervious to criticism (Kastely, 1999). But, this is not the only understanding of argument, there are many. One other way to understand argument is through deliberative and/or dialectical argument. Both are centered around a more collaborative understanding of argument that is interested in the other members of argument and debate as well as their ideas and contribution to the topic at hand. It is not based in a win/lose binary, but more associated with both/and thinking that requires vulnerability to the idea of being influenced and shifting of thoughts, as well as finding commonalities that can lead to cooperative solutions and/or paths (Kastely, 1999).
Issue campaigns, are campaigns that deal with issues, such as: policy issues and ballot initiatives. These campaigns are typically performed at many different sites, for example: in policy rhetoric, in political ads, speech rally's, protest rally's, on the bodies of those engaged in the campaign(s), in press releases, on websites, in canvassing efforts, in PR, etc etc.
After a quick review of what is argument and what is issue campaign we can begin the exploration of the metaphor Argument as Issue Campaign. To think of Argument as Issue Campaign invites us to expand our conception of each individual construct and think of them as a combination, in relationship, as a new idea and understanding, as a new mode of perception (Blumenberg, 1960), and as a mode of thought (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980).
This metaphor invites us to think argument as not only a verbal speech act, but also as something nonverbal, and even visual, marked on bodies, disseminated to masses, interpersonal canvassing, fundraising, as lies, misinformation, fact based claims, value based claims, policy based claims, organizing, viral, technology, statist, punditry, satire, and parody....just to name a few.
Although this is a preliminary inquiry into Argument as Issue Campaign I hope that it will spawn some ideas about how to think of argument as a metaphor, how to think of this particular metaphor, and how to think of argument differently. I invite you to marinate on this with me for awhile, so that when I return we can add more to this. Additionally, I want to think of this metaphor through a rhetorical case study of the Wisconsin Union Issue Campaigns (for and against WI unions rights to collective bargaining). Thoughts?
Blumenberg, H. (1960). Paradigmen zu einer meaphorologie.
Kastely, J. L. (1999). From formalism to inquiry: A model of argument in Antigone. College English, 62(2).
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Wisconsin Republicans Passed Bill Without Democrats
Tonight Wisconsin republicans passed legislation without the democrats.
Footage of the evening, available online and which has been circulating on the media, shows our democracy in crisis (1). In a state that was part of the birth of the labor movement (2), legislation has been passed that not only strips pubic unions of their bargaining rights (3), but the way it was passed should be a wake up call (you know, just in case you have been pushing snooze).
I talk about politics all the time, and I can have lots of different opinions on a lot of different things. But I will say here, what I have said before: One of the things I love about our country and our political values is debate.
The chance to allow competing voices to be heard…it is a beautiful thing.
What I see in this video should wake us up. And when I say us- I am suggesting people who care about the practices of debate and dialogue in our political system.
1- The Joint Committee on Conference met on March 9, 2011 at the state Capitol. The Republicans approved to adopt a revised budget repair bill, Special Session Assembly Bill 11. http://wiseye.org/Programming/VideoArchive/EventDetail.aspx?evhdid=3885
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
