Whatfactors determine the nature and pace of technological development? The literature on social construction of technology and actor-network theory suggests that assembling "coalitions" of support and conveying a certain "rhetoric" of technology are important to moving technology forward They are especially crucial strategies for advocates of large-scale, government-supported technologies. These strategies are illuminated by cases of U.S. space satellite development: meteorological satellites, land satellites, and the Earth Observation System.
This paper offers a critical political-economy of the promise and disappointment of the for- profit Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC) in higher education. Our goal is to encourage awareness, dialogue, and reflexivity about the gap between the rhetoric and reality of the MOOC in higher education and to highlight and interrogate the persuasive and profit power interests served by "the rhetoric of the MOOC." To this end, the first section outlines our critical approach and defines some key concepts: "the rhetoric of technology," "the political- economy of edu-tech" and "the public sphere." The second section highlights the MOOC's rhetorical promises and real disappointments. The third section contextualizes the "rhetoric of the MOOC" with regard to the persuasive and profit power interests it serves, and then evaluates this rhetoric with regard to the norms and values of the public sphere. We argue this rhetoric is a promotional discourse that is a poor guide to public deliberation and decision making about the role of technology in higher education. In closing, we propose the ideal and practice "technological citizenship" to encourage policy-makers, administrators, professors and students to have more democratic dialogue about educational technology, so that they, not the rhetoric of educational technology and the industry that sells it, can design the future of higher education.
Policymakers increasingly demand private enterprises to help solve social and ecological challenges faced by nations worldwide. In this article, we use Toulmin's rhetoric model to explain how European Union policy rhetoric articulates the meaning of entrepreneurship for sustainable development. Our findings demonstrate a "rhetoric mix" of argumentations through which policy rhetoric conveys three meanings of entrepreneurship—beneficiary in corrective sustainability, contributor in constructive sustainability, and opportunistic operator in assertive sustainability—and imposes shared beliefs that frame the policy discourse. In conclusion, we introduce a framework of "rhetoric mix" to advance research on entrepreneurship policy discourse and sustainable entrepreneurship. ; Peer reviewed
"Few developments in contemporary politics are more striking than the frequency with which the term "fascist" is used to describe specific actors and groups. This marks a qualitative shift in our political discourse. For decades, "fascist" was an epithet used to brand one's political opponents, regardless of political ideology or governing philosophy, but most often to attack a specific individual. With the rise of extremist parties and candidates in Europe, the U.S., and around the globe, however, even mainstream political commentators have begun using the term "fascism" to describe what they see as a dangerous movement that has revived and repackaged many of the strategies long thought to have been relegated to the margins of political rhetoric. This book defines and interprets the common persuasive devices that characterize fascist discourse to understand the nature of its enduring appeal, and which has resurfaced as one of the most pressing problems of our time. A definition of fascism that guides the contributors here draws from the work of Kenneth Burke: the sustained and systematic deployment of rhetorical devices aimed at promoting the cult of irrationality by identifying both the victimhood and the inborn dignity of a newly crystalized social group, sanctioned by tradition, whose rebirth requires the spiritualization of injustice and internal and external purification through redemptive violence. This definition has much in common with established understandings of fascism, but a rhetorical approach emphasizes less how fascism manifests itself in parties, platforms, regimes, movements, and organizations, but rather on the tendencies in language itself that make these manifestations possible. Introductory chapters focus on general theories of fascism drawn from 20th-century history and theory. The remaining chapters investigate specific historical figures and their relationship to contemporary rhetorics. As indicated by their titles, each chapter focuses on defining a specific rhetorical device that seems characteristic of fascist rhetoric. This book does not promise a comprehensive inquiry into all aspects of fascism. The topics were selected by the authors based on their own expertise and because they illuminate a specific rhetorical device. A reader, by the end, should have acquired many of the conceptual critical resources by which to identify familiar fascist strategies of persuasion and propaganda"--
This Article promotes the serious consideration of innocence in the criminal process, and gives meaning to the rhetoric surrounding the presumption of innocence. The first part illustrates the near irrelevance of innocence in an accusatorial system of justice where burdens of proof require proof of guilt The second and third parts of the Article discuss the meaning of the presumption of innocence. It is argued that legislatures and courts have ignored the tension between the conflicting goals of the criminal process by thinking of the presumption of innocence as a legal presumption. As a legal presumption, its effects are indistinguishable from the reasonable doubt rule. Arguments are presented that the presumption should be factually based so that jurors are asked to assume the accused's innocence in fact. This Article concludes with a proposal for a factually based assumption of innocence.
Luonto lienee kulttuurimme ongelmallisimpia ja monimutkaisimpia sanoja. Sen merkitys vaihtelee niin arkisessa kuin erityisalojenkin käytössä, mutta toisaalta tietyt hallitsevat merkitykset luovat sanaan liittyviä oletuksia. Usein luonto ymmärretäänkin ei-inhimilliseksi ympäristöksi. Silti sanan merkitys voi samassa tilanteessa muuntua ohjaten koko keskustelua uuteen suuntaan. Merkitysten kirjavuus ja toisaalta itse sanan keskeinen kulttuurinen asema antavat mahdollisuuden käyttää merkityksen muutoksia hyväksi. Tällaiset luonnon merkityksen ongelmat ilmenevät mitä moninaisemmissa ajankohtaisissa keskusteluissa esimerkiksi geeniteknologiasta, ihmistoiminnan selittämisestä, seksuaalisuudesta tai ilmastonmuutoksesta. Ilmiöiden luonnollisuus ja luonnottomuus ovat arkisia määrittelykamppailujen kenttiä. Luonnon ongelma onkin väistämättä kytkeytynyt kysymyksiin arvoista, normeista ja vallasta. Tämän tutkimuksen päätarkoitus on kehittää ja koetella työkaluja, joiden avulla luonnon moninaisia merkityksiä ja niiden käyttöä voisi ymmärtää. Ajankohtaiset keskustelut ja niihin liittyvät odotukset ovat kuitenkin meitä niin lähellä, että merkitysten muutoksia on vaikea havaita. Siksi tämä tutkimus lähestyy asiaa historiallisen esimerkin kautta. Tutkimuskohde on Jean-Jacques Rousseaun teos "Tutkielma ihmisten välisen eriarvoisuuden alkuperästä ja perusteista" (Discours sur l Origine et les Fondements de l Inégalité parmi les Hommes, 1755). Teos on filosofian, antropologian, poliittisen historian ja monien muiden alojen klassikko. Luonto on varmasti Rousseaun tärkein filosofinen termi, ja sen merkityksestä tässä teoksessa on kiistelty vuosikymmenten ajan. Tämän tutkimuksen kannalta olennaista on se, että Rousseau pyrki teoksen avulla kritisoimaan edeltäviä ja aikansa filosofeja ja oman aikansa yhteiskuntia. Tutkimuksessa tarkastellaankin luonnon retoriikkaa sekä Rousseaun filosofiassa että myöhemmässä kommentaarikirjallisuudessa. Ville Lähde korostaa uudenlaisessa tulkinnassaan, että luonnon merkityksen muutokset olivat Rousseaun filosofian olennainen piirre. Hän tarkastelee teosta neljän eri filosofisen motiivin valossa ja osoittaa havainnollisesti, miten luonnon merkityksen muutokset ja jopa näennäiset ristiriitaisuudet, jotka ovat hämmentäneet Rousseau-tutkijoita, ovat ymmärrettävissä filosofisten motiivien muutoksen kautta. Rousseaun teoksen sisältämä kuvitteellinen historiallinen kertomus on kirjallinen väline, jonka avulla Rousseau 1) kritisoi toisia filosofeja, 2) kritisoi aikansa kaupungistuvaa yhteiskuntaa, 3) pohtii ihmisyyden luonnetta ja 4) rakentaa omaa poliittista filosofiaansa. Tämä tulkinta osoittaa, miten Rousseau pystyi merkitysten muutosten avulla haastamaan luutuneita tapoja keskustella ihmisluonnosta, yhteiskuntien oikeutuksesta tai eriarvoisuuden luonteesta. Rousseau tapauksen tutkiminen auttaa meitä paitsi ymmärtämään ongelmallisia nykykeskusteluita, se myös opettaa, että käsitteellisen yhtenäisyyden haastaminen voi raivata tietä kohti uudenlaista ajattelua. ; Nature is one of the most problematic and complex words of our culture. Its meaning diverges both in everyday and specialist use, but certain dominant meanings also create expectations as to the meaning of the word. Often nature is understood as the nonhuman environment. Nevertheless, in the same context the meaning of the word may alter, directing the whole discussion to another direction. The diversity of meanings on the one hand, and the central cultural role of the word itself afford possibilities to take advantage of changes of meaning. Such problems with nature are apparent in a multitude of contemporary debates over issues like gene technology, explanations of human behavior, sexuality or climate change. Naturalness and unnaturalness of these phenomena are everyday forums for struggles of definition. The problem of nature is thus inevitably linked to questions of values, norms and power. The main aim of this study is to develop and test tools that might aid us in understanding the multiple meanings of nature and their application. Contemporary debates and the accompanying expectations are however so close to us that it is hard to perceive such changes. Thus this study approaches the issue through a historical example. The object of inquiry is Jean-Jacques Rousseau s book "Discourse on the Origin and the Foundations of Inequality Among Men" (Discours sur l Origine et les Fondements de l Inégalité parmi les Hommes, 1755). It is a classic of philosophy, anthropology, political history and many other fields. Nature is undoubtedly Rousseau s most important philosophical term, and its meaning in this book has been debated for decades. For this study it is especially intriguing that Rousseau tried with his Discourse to criticize earlier and contemporary philosophers and the societies of his time. This study thus looks at the rhetoric of nature both in Rousseau s time and in the later commentaries. In his novel reading Ville Lähde emphasizes that the changes in the meaning of nature were an essential feature of Rousseau s philosophy. He investigates the Discourse in light of four distinct philosophical motives and illuminates how the changes in the meaning of nature , even the apparent contradictions that have baffled Rousseau-scholars, can be understood through the shifts in philosophical motives. Rousseau s speculative narrative of the history of humanity is a literary tool which allows him to 1) criticize other philosophers, 2) attack the urbanizing contemporary societies, 3) explore the constitution of humanity and 4) construct his own political philosophy. This interpretation shows how Rousseau was able to challenge reified ways to understand human nature, legitimacy of certain social structures or the nature of inequality with these changes of meaning. Investigating the case of Rousseau helps us not only to clarify the conundrums in contemporary debates, it also teaches that challenging the assumption of conceptual unity can clear the terrain for novel thought.
