Discussion Paper on Language as Symbolic Action
Albert Einstein once proclaimed, “Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.” Kenneth Burke’s theory of rhetoric derives from the principle that language is the methods by which we create reality. The only way to perceive and give meaning to an event is through language. Through a binary approach of classification, Burke is able to make a distinction when it comes to the nature of language. Additionally, Burke relates the terministic screens to symbols and the notion of reality. Finally, Burke’s example of perception is relatable to John Locke’s concept of language being imperfect. In Language as Symbolic Action, Burke relies on the use of terministic screens to define
…show more content…
Since words are symbolic, society uses words that reflect its own beliefs and realities. Burke talks about terminologies as being always constructed in the principle of continuity and discontinuity (Bizzell and Herzberg, 1344). Communication always deals with concepts like: opposing statements, dogmas, and values. In reference to this notion, Burke writes, "Even if any given terminology is a reflection of reality, by its very nature as a terminology it must be a selection of reality; and to this extent it must function also as a deflection of reality”(Bizzell and Herzberg, 1341). This description of terministic screens can be broken down into three individual parts. Firstly, there exists the reflection of reality which is occurrences and viewpoints that we choose to accept as true. These reflections become our reality and the ways we perceive the world around us. Secondly, there are the selections of reality. By selecting these realities, we are ridding ourselves of other reflections. As a result, humans do not have the capability to acknowledge all possible viewpoints. Thirdly, there are the deflections of reality, which are the realities that humans deny automatically by taking on their own reflections. The deflections may be things that humans may choose to not accept because they may disagree with their views and …show more content…
Locke writes, “The greatest part of disputes were more about the signification of words than a real difference in the conception of things” (Bizzell and Herzberg, 822). The issue for Locke was the perception of language imperfectly represents things. Moreover, this highlights Locke’s concept of imperfection. Locke states, “The imperfection of words is the doubtfulness…which is caused by the sort of ideas they stand for” (Bizzell and Herzberg,
The author’s main argument in “Rhetoric: Making Sense of Human Interaction and Meaning-Making” is that rhetoric does not need to be complicated if writers incorporate certain elements to their writing. Downs further analyzed the elements that contribute to rhetoric such as symbols and signals, motivation, emotion, ecology, reasoning and identification. The author emphasized that writers can learn how to deliver their writing effectively once they are more aware on how rhetoric works. Downs constantly assures that rhetoric is quite simple and does not need to provoke fuzziness. Even though the term rhetorical is applied to everything, the author of the article made it clear that the “rhetorical” thing is situated. The example provided by the author in this article, further guides our understanding on what rhetoric
In “Defending Against the Indefensible,” author and professor Neil Postman proposes that language has been abused in modern society by people manipulating it and brainwashing the others. Hence, he suggests seven elements for critical intelligence that can help with identifying and avoiding the manipulative use of language: definition, questions, simple words, metaphor, reification, style and tone, and media.
Lloyd F. Bitzer’s article, “The Rhetorical Situation”, is an account of what he calls the “rhetorical situation” as what he believes to be the conditions necessary for compelling a rhetorician to engage in rhetoric (35). It is Bitzer’s position that a work of rhetoric comes into existence as a response to the call of a certain state of affairs in the world (32). Furthermore, Bitzer claims that when we find ourselves in such “situations”, we are compelled to engage in rhetoric in order to restore the balance that we find lacking (34). He identifies three interconnected elements of situational rhetoric: exigence, audience, and constraints (35). Bitzer argues that a rhetorical discourse, which consists of an engagement with an audience for the purpose of compelling that audience to modify the world so as to repair the problem which is presented (35), is required to solve the problem as the world presents it (34). This lack of balance in a rhetorical situation or state of affairs in the world leads to what Bitzer calls exigence, which he defines as “an imperfection marked by urgency” (36). Bitzer also expands on the notion of a rhetorical audience, which is central to his theory of situational rhetoric. Bitzer defines a rhetorical audience as persons who, through discourse, are subject to influence and as persons who can be compelled to bring about the change called for by a rhetorical situation (37). Bitzer also identifies constraints as being a vital component to his theory, which he defines as anything within the rhetorical situation which has the power to “constrain decision” (38).
Locke, John Essay concerning Humane Understanding, Book II ("Of Ideas"), Chapter 1 ("Of Ideas in General, and Their Original")
In The Rhetorical Situation, Lloyd F. Bitzer argues that what makes a situation rhetorical is similar to that which constitutes a moral action as he writes that, “an act is moral because it is an act performed in a situation of a certain kind; similarly, a work is rhetorical because it is a response to a situation of a certain kind”.(3) By defining the rhetorical situation in this way, Bitzer further contends that rhetoric is a means to altering reality. (4) It is through the use of discourse that one is capable of changing reality through thought and action. (4) Bitzer then elaborates upon the nature of a rhetorical situation by explaining that rhetorical discourse enters a situation when: providing a response to its state of affairs; rhetorical discourse is given significant presence by the situation; the situation exists as a necessary condition for rhetorical discourse to have effect; a rhetorical situation or event may mature or decay over time; the rhetorical situation invites the use of discourse to alter its reality; the rhetorical response given to the situation is appropriate; and the situation controls the response of the discourse. While Bitzer notes that these are parameters for a situation to qualify as being rhetorical, he further discusses three constituents that are present in any rhetorical situation prior to the presence and manipulation of discourse. (6) Exigence, audience, and constraints are seen to be necessary elements in a rhetorical situation for Bitzer. Exegince, “is an imperfection marked by urgency; it is a defect, an obstacle, something waiting to be undone, a thing which is other than it should be”. (6) An audience whose members may function as mediators of change is required, as rhetoric alw...
Locke, an indirect realist, explores our immediate perceptions and with this attempts to draw a line between ideas and qualities, just how these are different entities. Sometimes referred to as Representative Theory, according to Locke, we are aware only of our ideas, these being things existing “in our minds”, sensations created. Our perceptions are indirect and their qualities, these are the causal properties of physical objects that then cause those sensations. This dualistic account
John Locke's, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690), was first criticized by the philosopher and theologian, John Norris of Bemerton, in his "Cursory Reflections upon a Book Call'd, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding," and appended to his Christian Blessedness or Discourses upon the Beatitudes (1690). Norris's criticisms of Locke prompted three replies, which were only posthumously published. Locke has been viewed, historically, as the winner of this debate; however, new evidence has emerged which suggests that Norris's argument against the foundation of knowledge in sense-perception that the Essay advocated was a valid and worthy critique, which Locke did, in fact, take rather seriously. Charlotte Johnston's "Locke's Examination of Malebranche and John Norris" (1958), has been widely accepted as conclusively showing that Locke's replies were not philosophical, but rather personal in origin; her essay, however, overlooks critical facts that undermine her subjective analysis of Locke's stance in relation to Norris's criticisms of the Essay. This paper provides those facts, revealing the philosophical—not personal—impetus for Locke's replies.
This essay discusses John Locke statement: “it is as insignificant to ask, whether Man’s Will be free, as to ask, whether his Sleep be Swift, or his Vertue square: Liberty being as little applicable to the Will, as swiftness of Motion is to Sleep, or squareness to Vertue.” Locke came to this conclusion while writing on the subject Of Power in An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Subsequently, I argue whether Locke is successful in establishing this parameter against the Will’s being Free. I conclude that Locke makes an inconsistent and unclear argument about this specific subject. This conclusion will be address in this essay. In order to perform this task, I will first state the argument that Locke makes. An explanation of the argument will follow after. Next, I will offer an argument that contradicts Locke’s view. Finally, I will demonstrate how Locke’s argument can be attacked, making it unstable to its previous claim.
One of the first things that has always caught my attention with the concepts of Deconstruction has to do with the representation of reality and truth through language. Since we learned via Saussere's structuralist linguistics that the word as we know it is arbitrary and dependent on signification for meaning, how can we be assured that the signification and contexts we are using are the right ones to convey reality? The readings this week of Jacques Derrida, Jonathan Culler, and others shed light upon how the process of deconstruction works to identify the structural assumptions we make when deriving meaning, and how those can be exposed through the deconstructive process to critically examine what represents experience and reality.
3. Briggs, Peter M. "Locke's "Essay" and the Tentativeness of "Tristram Shandy"" Studies in Philology. University of North Carolina Press, 1985. N. pag. JSTOR. Web.
...ry, it is easy to notice how people need different things, and require alternate ways of studying. You notice people’s emotions and how they react to their surroundings. Some people need silence, some need music, some need space, some need distraction and some people just do it to look good.
The first philosopher, John Locke, laid the foundations of modern empiricism. Locke is a representational realist who touches reality through feelings. He believes that experience gives us knowledge (ideas) that makes us able to deal with the world external to our minds. His meaning of ideas is "the immediate object of perception, thought, or understanding." Locke's ideas consist of simply ideas which turn into complex ideas. Simple ideas are the thoughts that the mind cannot know an idea that it has not experienced. The two types of simple ideas are; sensation and reflection. Sensation is the idea that we have such qualities as yellow, white, heat, cold, soft, hard, bitter, and sweet. Reflection ideas are gained from our experience of our own mental operations. Complex ideas are combinations of simple ideas that can be handled as joined objects and given their own names. These ideas are manufactured in the human mind by the application of its higher powers. Locke believes in two kinds of qualities that an object must have; primary and secondary. Primary qualities o...
Our thinking is derived from meaning and only our communication may seem above the signified objects our mind sees because it’s another order in itself. The preliminary actions taken before communication or before an event must be organized as a certain discourse can be made with significance either better or worse. Derrida explains context can never be certainly one fashion; indeterminable. Any writing should be seen as a means of communication, and that its options extend far, but not infinite as we have limited senses we can communicate with. He makes a reference to Condillac, who introduces a way of “tracing,”
Locke, John. The Works of John Locke in Nine Volumes. 12th ed. Vol. 4. London: Rivington,
John Locke, a philosopher that published a book, titled “An Essay Concerning Human Understanding” in this book Locke talks about sensitive knowledge. What is sensitive knowledge? Locke definition of sensitive knowledge is “Knowledge is the perception of the agreement or disagreement of two ideas” (IV, I, 2) knowledge is the agreement or disagreement of two ideas that you are aware of. The “ideas” Locke mention in this definition are things that you immediately perceived, things that you immediately became aware of. For example, a person sees a chair in front of them, they are perceiving the chair directly and those thing you are perceiving are your ideas (the chair). In this paper, I am going to show how Locke successfully defends himself