Critical Rhetoric: Theory and Praxis

CRITICAL RHETORIC: THEORY AND PRAXIS

### Author: Raymie E. McKerrow

This essay outlines a theoretical rationale for critical rhetoric and introduces principles that orient critics toward the act of criticism.

I. Theoretical Rationale for Critical Rhetoric

  • Forms of Critique: Two forms are defined:

    • Critique of Domination: Focuses on how discourse maintains elite privilege.

    • Critique of Freedom: Concentrates on maintaining social relations across human activities.

  • Commonalities: Both forms analyze the discourse of power.

  • Transformative Practice: Critique is viewed as transformative rather than merely methodological.

  • Materiality of Discourse: Recognizes that rhetoric shapes and is shaped by material conditions.

  • Rhetoric as Doxastic: Interprets rhetoric as opinion-based instead of rooted in objective knowledge (epistemic).

  • Rhetoric as Nominalistic: Challenges universalistic definitions, supporting a recognition of context-specific meanings.

  • Influential vs. Causal: Emphasizes rhetoric's influence rather than its ability to cause.

  • Importance of Presence and Absence: Acknowledges that absence carries significance in interpreting discourse.

  • Polysemic Interpretation: Rhetoric is understood as open to multiple interpretations.

  • Performance: Critique is constructed as a performative act.

II. Historical Background

  • Plato's Critique: Rhetoric has been marginalized by philosophers, particularly Plato, viewed as subservient to truth.

    • Plato's critique of rhetoric is grounded in his belief that it is a tool that can be used to manipulate the truth rather than convey it. He views rhetoric as subservient to philosophy and truth, arguing that the art of persuasion often prioritizes emotional appeal over factual accuracy.

      • Subservience to Truth: Plato believes that rhetoric lacks substance; it is designed to persuade rather than inform. For him, philosophers seek truth and knowledge, whereas rhetoricians aim to win over audiences regardless of the veracity of their messages.

      • Moral Concerns: He raises ethical concerns surrounding rhetoric, suggesting that it can be used to deceive and manipulative rather than promote genuine understanding. Plato's characters, particularly Socrates, frequently criticize rhetoricians for prioritizing persuasive power over moral responsibility, especially in the context of political discourse.

      • The Allegory of the Cave: Through this allegory in "The Republic," Plato illustrates that most people are trapped in ignorance, only seeing shadows of reality. He contends that rhetoricians keep people entrapped in this ignorance by presenting persuasive, yet flawed, arguments rather than guiding them toward the truth, as philosophers strive to do.

      • Universal Standards: Plato often indicates that rhetoric's revival relies on universally accepted standards of reasoning. He believes that true knowledge, not merely persuasive language, is needed for ethical and informed decision-making in society.

      • Philosopher-King: Plato envisions a governing class of philosopher-kings who possess the wisdom and knowledge necessary to lead society. This ideal contrasts sharply with a reliance on rhetoric, which he sees as potentially harmful without the guiding principles of truth and virtue.

      In summary, Plato’s critique views rhetoric with skepticism, highlighting its potential for manipulation and its often tenuous relationship with knowledge and truth, thus relegating it to a lesser status compared to the pursuit of philosophical understanding.

  • Aristotle's Response: In contrast, Aristotle emphasizes rhetoric as a vital tool for communication, acknowledging its persuasive power and its role in societal discourse.


  • Universal Standards: Attempts to revive rhetoric often rely on universal standards of reason, maintaining rhetoric's peripheral role.

  • Key Theorists:

    • Habermas: “Ideal speech situation” emphasizes rationality.

    • Perelman: Focus on “universal audience.”

    • Toulmin: Advocates for an “impartial standpoint of rationality.”

  • Aim of Critical Rhetoric: The task is to position rhetoric as a critical practice independent of universalist constraints.

III. Features of a Critical Rhetoric

  • Critical Spirit: Shares commonality with critical theorists like Horkheimer and Foucault.

  • Effectivity of Communication: Explores how discourse operates within social power, impacting knowledge among social groups.

  • Demystifying Function: Aims to reveal how rhetoric conceals and reveals power relations.

  • Partisanship: Criticism implicates a stance against certain social conditions and movements.

  • Consequentiality: Effective critique should lead to tangible outcomes or actions in society.

IV. Critique of Domination
A. Discourse of Power

  • Focus: Analyzes how discourse creates and maintains control.

  • Ideology and Power: Giddens distinguishes between discourse and lived beliefs.

    • Ideology critiqued in terms of its role in legitimizing ruling class interests.

  • Rituals of Power: Domination is expressed through social structures and rituals affirming the ruling class.

  • Foucault's Orders of Discourse: Establishes norms on who speaks and the contents of discourse.

  • Censorship: The ruling class enforces norms through acceptance rather than direct censorship.

V. Domination and Hegemony

  • Dialectic of Control: The dynamic influences both dominant and dominated groups.

  • Subjectivity: The dominated cannot wholly escape the impact of the ruling class’s ideology.

  • Class vs. People: Differentiation between class struggles and broader social struggles.

  • Rhetorical Construction of People: The ‘people’ are shaped by discourse and social relations, emphasizing the complexities of political identity.

  • Hegemony: Power constructs political subjectivity through discourse.

VI. Critique of Freedom
A. Foucault's Perspective

  • Power Diffusion: Critiques traditional views of power as solely repressive.

  • Permanent Criticism: Challenges societal norms to foster ongoing skepticism and transformative possibilities.

  • Historical Analysis: Opposes totalizing narratives, focusing instead on social discontinuities.

B. Discourse and Power

  • Beyond State Power: Foucault critiques narrowly focused power analyses.

  • Types of Power Discourses: Differentiates between legalistic and conflict-based power discourses.

  • Microphysics of Power: Analyzes power relations at all societal levels, emphasizing discourse's active role.

  • Transformative Potential of Discourse: Discourse becomes an instrument for societal change, revealing and undermining established power.

VII. Principles of Praxis
A. Critical Rhetoric Orientation

  1. Ideologiekritik as Practice: Concentrates on understanding rather than methodically applying a formula.

  2. Material Nature of Ideology: Roots ideologies in the discourse that constitutes them.

  3. Doxastic Knowledge: Places value on opinion and reputation in understanding rhetoric.

  4. Influence vs. Causality: Recognizes rhetoric's influence rather than attributing direct causation.

  5. Importance of Absence: Evaluates what is excluded in discourse, not just what is present.

  6. Polysemic Interpretation: Encourages diverse readings of texts showing complex social realities.

  7. Criticism as Performance: Acknowledges critics engage in interpretative acts as performances not just assessments.

Summary

  • The essay seeks to provide a comprehensive theoretical rationale and principles for a critical rhetoric that emphasizes a postmodern approach towards the relationship between discourse and power. It champions the notion that critique should lead to transformative possibilities rather than adhere strictly to universal standards of reason. The articulation of rhetoric as doxastic and its practice as a performance reflects an evolved understanding of human interaction in discourse.