Using Speech to Disturb Consensus: Or, Taking Rhetoric (and its Agonistic Roots) Seriously

  • Loïc Nicolas
Keywords: agôn, conformism, decision, democracy, disagreement

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to discuss and criticize – from Aristotle, through Perelman, to Mouffe – the traditional view of rhetoric as a “peace” of words. The principal purpose is to show that it is necessary to understand how rhetoric, and its practice, can represent a real opportunity to question consensus, to disturb it, and that this can be good for the social process and the political space. Democracy cannot be well practiced without rhetoric, without a transmission of rhetorical tools with which individuals can raise their voice with, but also against, others – and their consensus. A well-understood use of rhetoric could rightly be seen as a “school” for practicing disagreement, and how to accept the vulnerability that results from this.

References

ALBERT, L., NICOLAS, L. (2010), Polémique et rhétorique de l’Antiquité à nos jours, De Boeck, Bruxelles.

AMOSSY, Ruth (2010), The functions of polemical discourse in the public sphere, in SMITH, M., WARNICK, B. (a cura), The Responsibilities of Rhetoric, Waveland Press, Long Grove (IL), pp. 52-51.

AMOSSY, Ruth (2012), «From National Consensus to Political Dissent: The Rhetorical Uses of the Masada Myth in Israel», in Rivista Iitaliana di Filosofia del Linguaggio, vol. 6, n. 3, pp. 1-15, www.rifl.unical.it/index.php/rifl/article/view/29/26.

AMOSSY, Ruth (2014), Apologie de la polémique, PUF, Paris.

ANGENOT, Marc (1982), La Parole pamphlétaire. Typologie des discours modernes, Payot, Paris.

ANGENOT, Marc (2008), Dialogues de sourds. Traité de rhétorique antilogique, Mille et une Nuits, Paris.

APFEL, Lauren J. (2011), The Advent of Pluralism, Oxford University Press, Oxford & New York.

ARISTOTLE (1929), Politics, transl. by Jowett B., introduction, analysis and index by Davis H.W.C., Clarendon Press, Oxford.

ARISTOTLE (1957), The “Art” of Rhetoric, transl. by Freese J. H., Harvard University Press & William Heinemann Ltd, Cambridge & London.

ARNASON, J. P., MURPHY, P. (2001), Agôn, Logos, Polis. The Greek Achievement and its Aftermath, Franz Steiner, Stuttgart.

ASCH, Solomon E. (1955), «Opinions and Social Pressure», in Scientific American, vol. 193, n. 5, pp. 31-35.

ASCH, Solomon E. (1956), «Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority», in Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, vol. 70, n. 9, 416, pp. 1-70.

BARATIN, Marc (2003), La polémique et les traités de rhétorique dans l’antiquité romaine, in DECLERCQ, G., MURAT, M., DANGEL, J., (a cura), La Parole polémique, Honoré Champion, Paris, pp. 255-262.

CICERO (1967), De Oratore, transl. by Sutton E.W., Rackham H., Heinemann W., Ltd & Harvard University Press, London & Cambridge (MA).

COHEN David (1995), Law, Violence, and Community in Classical Athens, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

DECLERCQ, Gilles (2003), Rhétorique et polémique, in DECLERCQ, G., MURAT, M., DANGEL, J. (a cura), La Parole polémique, Honoré Champion, Paris, pp. 17-21.

VAN EEMEREN, Frans H., et al. (1996), Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory: A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (NJ).

VAN EEMEREN, Frans H., GARSSEN, B. (2008) a cura di, Controversy and Confrontation: Relating controversy analysis with argumentation theory, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam & Philadelphia (PA).

DUCHEMIN, Jacqueline (1968), L’Agôn dans la tragédie grecque, Les Belles Lettres, Paris.

DEBRA, Hawhee (2002), «Agonism and Aretê», in Philosophy and Rhetoric, vol. 35, n. 3, pp. 185-207.

KALIVAS, Andreas (2009), The Democratic Narcissus: The Agonism of the Ancients Compared to that of the (Post) Moderns, in SCHAAP, Andrew (a cura), Law and Agonistic Politics, Ashgate Publishing Co, Farnham, pp. 15-41.

KERBRAT-ORECCHIONI, Catherine (1980), La polémique et ses définitions, in KERBRAT-ORECCHIONI, C., GELAS, N. (a cura), Le discours polémique, PUL, Lyon, pp. 3-40.

LASSMAN, Peter (2011), Pluralism, Polity Press, Cambridge.

MOUFFE, Chantal (1999), «Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism», in Social Research, vol. 66, n. 3, pp. 745-758, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40971349.

MOUFFE, Chantal (2005 [1993]), The Return of the political, Verso, London & New York.

MOUFFE, Chantal (2005 [2000]), The Democratic Paradox, Verso, London & New York.

MOUFFE, Chantal (2005), On the Political. Thinking in Action, Routledge, London.

NICOLAS, Loïc (2015a), «Charlie Hebdo ou la société malade de son verbe», in La Cité (Genève), n. 4, pp. 22-23.

NICOLAS, Loïc (2015b), «L’épidictique de Chaïm Perelman: assise et pivot de l’édifice rhétorique», in FERRY, V., DI PIAZZA, S. (a cura), Rivista Iitaliana di Filosofia del Linguaggio, special issue, «Les rhétoriques de la concorde / Le retoriche della concordia», pp. 33-47, http://www.rifl.unical.it/index.php/rifl/article/view/251/240.

NICOLAS, Loïc (2015c), Discours et liberté. Contribution à l’histoire politique de la rhétorique, Classiques Garnier, Paris.

NUSSBAUM, Martha C. (2013), Political Emotions. Why Love Matters for Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA).

PERELMAN, Chaïm (1982 [1977]), The Realm of Rhetoric, (transl. by Klubac W., Arnold C. C., University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame (IN) & London).

PERELMAN, Chaïm (1989 [1968]), «Une théorie philosophique de l’argumentation», in Rhétoriques, Ed. de l’ULB, Bruxelles, pp. 243-256.

PERELMAN, Chaïm (1990 [1966]), «Considérations sur la raison pratique», in Éthique et droit, Ed. de l’ULB, Bruxelles, pp. 406-419.

PERELMAN, Chaïm (1990 [1984]), «Les conceptions concrètes et abstraites de la raison et de la justice. (À propos de Theory of Justice de John Rawls)», in Éthique et droit, Ed. de l’ULB, Bruxelles, pp. 285-297.

PERELMAN, Chaïm (2009 [1949]) «Le libre examen hier et aujourd’hui», in Modernité du libre examen. Textes de Chaïm Perelman et Jean Stengers, Ed. de l’ULB, Bruxelles, pp. 137-147.

PERELMAN, C., OLBRECHTS-TYTECA, L. (1969 [1958]), The New Rhetoric. A Treatise on Argumentation. (transl. by Wilkinson J., Weaver P., University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame (IN) & London).

QUINTILIAN (1977), Institutio Oratoria, vol. 2, (transl. by Butler H. E., Harvard University Press & William Heinemann Ltd, Cambridge (MA) & London).

RAWLS, John (1971), A Theory of Justice, Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA).

RAWLS, John (1983), Political Liberalism, Columbia University Press, New York.

RICŒUR, Paul (1999 [1990]), «Langage politique et rhétorique», in Lectures I. Autour du politique, Seuil, Paris, pp. 161-175.

SIPIORA, P., BAUMLIN, J. S. (2002), a cura di, Kairos and Rhetoric. Essays in History, Theory, and Praxis, State University of New York Press, Albany (NY).

STUART MILL, John (1978 [1859]), On Liberty, introduction by Rapaport E., Hackett Publishing Compagny, Inc., Indianiapolis (IN) & Cambridge.

TACITUS (1942), A Dialogue on Oratory, in HADAS M., Complete Works, (transl. by Church A. J., Brodribb W. J., Random House, New York).

TALEB, Nassim Nicholas (2012), Antifragile. Things That Gain from Disorder, Random House, New York.

THATCHER, Margaret (1969), «Consensus, or choice?», Daily Telegraph, February, 19.

THIMSEN, A. Freya (2015), «The People Against Corporate Personhood: Doxa and Dissensual Democracy», in Quarterly Journal of Speech, vol. 101, n. 3, pp. 485-508.

TURNER, Brandon P. (2010), «John Stuart Mill and the Antagonistic Foundation of Liberal Politics», in The Review of Politics, vol. 72, n. 1, pp 25-53.

TRÉDÉ, Monique (1992), Kairos: L’à-propos et l’occasion. Le mot et la notion d’Homère à la fin du IVe siècle avant J.-C., Klincksieck, Paris.

WALTON, Douglas (1985), Arguer’s Position. A pragmatic Study of Ad Hominem, Attack, Criticism, Refutation, and Fallacy, Greenwood Press, Westport (CT).

WALTON, Douglas (1998), The New Dialectic: Conversational Contexts of Arguments, University of Toronto Press, Toronto.

WENMAN, Mark (2013), Agonistic Democracy. Constituent Power in the Era of Globalisation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

How to Cite
Nicolas, L. (1) “Using Speech to Disturb Consensus: Or, Taking Rhetoric (and its Agonistic Roots) Seriously”, Rivista Italiana di Filosofia del Linguaggio, 00. Available at: http://www.rifl.unical.it/index.php/rifl/article/view/386 (Accessed: 20May2024).
Section
Articoli