國立高雄大學圖資館 |

登入

回首頁

Saving persuasion :Rhetoric and judgment in political thought (Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, Aristotle, Marcus Tullius Cicero).

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Saving persuasion :
其他題名:	Rhetoric and judgment in political thought (Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, Aristotle, Marcus Tullius Cicero).
作者:	Garsten, Bryan David.
面頁冊數:	278 p.
附註:	Chair: Harvey Mansfield.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 64-09, Section: A, page: 3457.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International64-09A.
標題:	Political Science, General.
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3106636
ISBN:	049654201X

Saving persuasion :Rhetoric and judgment in political thought (Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, Aristotle, Marcus Tullius Cicero).
Garsten, Bryan David.

Saving persuasion :Rhetoric and judgment in political thought (Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, Aristotle, Marcus Tullius Cicero). [electronic resource] - 278 p.

Chair: Harvey Mansfield.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Harvard University, 2003.

Part One of the thesis argues that the roots of the modern case against rhetoric can be found in the form of social contract theory first put forth by Hobbes. In asking citizens to alienate their judgments to a sovereign, Hobbes aimed to undermine the practice of rhetoric that appealed to those judgments. While he certainly made use of rhetorical techniques gleaned from his humanist education, I argue (against recent scholarship) that he turned those techniques against the heart of the tradition from which they came. That tradition offered techniques for facilitating controversy; Hobbes's rhetoric aimed to surmount or avoid controversy. I go on to claim that in spite of their more democratic sensibilities, both Rousseau and Kant inherited and even radicalized Hobbes's opposition to the sort of deliberative controversy imagined in the rhetorical tradition.

ISBN: 049654201XSubjects--Topical Terms:

212408
Political Science, General.

Saving persuasion :Rhetoric and judgment in political thought (Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, Aristotle, Marcus Tullius Cicero).
LDR:03275nmm _2200277 _450 001 162111
005 20051017073411.5
008 230606s2003 eng d
020 $a 049654201X
035 $a 00148612
035 $a 162111
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 0 $a Garsten, Bryan David. $3 227224
245 1 0 $a Saving persuasion : $b Rhetoric and judgment in political thought (Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, Aristotle, Marcus Tullius Cicero). $h [electronic resource]
300 $a 278 p.
500 $a Chair: Harvey Mansfield.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 64-09, Section: A, page: 3457.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Harvard University, 2003.
520 # $a Part One of the thesis argues that the roots of the modern case against rhetoric can be found in the form of social contract theory first put forth by Hobbes. In asking citizens to alienate their judgments to a sovereign, Hobbes aimed to undermine the practice of rhetoric that appealed to those judgments. While he certainly made use of rhetorical techniques gleaned from his humanist education, I argue (against recent scholarship) that he turned those techniques against the heart of the tradition from which they came. That tradition offered techniques for facilitating controversy; Hobbes's rhetoric aimed to surmount or avoid controversy. I go on to claim that in spite of their more democratic sensibilities, both Rousseau and Kant inherited and even radicalized Hobbes's opposition to the sort of deliberative controversy imagined in the rhetorical tradition.
520 # $a Part Two of the thesis studies the accounts of rhetoric found in Aristotle and Cicero, paying special attention to the dangers they saw in persuasion and to the remedies they proposed. From Aristotle I derive concepts of deliberative partiality and situated judgment, suggesting that the dangers of rhetoric can be curbed not by principles of impartiality but by certain sorts of appeals to citizens' existing passions and prejudices. From Cicero I draw the concepts of shallow skepticism and reflective distance, suggesting that a rhetorical politics requires citizens open to revising their opinions but not skeptical about the grounds on which they do so. The final chapter of the dissertation shows how these concepts bear on recent approaches to deliberative democracy and points the way towards a different understanding of deliberation that incorporates persuasion and domesticates it within a system of constitutional government.
520 # $a Persuasion is a central activity of democratic politics, yet in both theory and practice today the conventional wisdom is that studied persuasion, or rhetoric, tends to corrupt serious political deliberations. This dissertation explores the roots of the modern suspicion of rhetoric, challenges its philosophical basis and points the way towards a conception of deliberation that is friendlier to rhetoric.
590 $a School code: 0084.
650 # 0 $a Political Science, General. $3 212408
650 # 0 $a Philosophy. $3 176573
650 # 0 $a Language, Rhetoric and Composition. $3 212535
710 0 # $a Harvard University. $3 212445
773 0 # $g 64-09A. $t Dissertation Abstracts International
790 $a 0084
790 1 0 $a Mansfield, Harvey, $e advisor
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2003
856 4 0 $u http://libsw.nuk.edu.tw/login?url=http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3106636 $z http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3106636