Contained in:
Book Chapter

A Rhetorical Model of Debating

  • Stephen M. Llano

A rhetorical model of the debate centered on the image of a labyrinth is more suitable than the metaphor of debate-as-game in describing the benefits of arguing in front of an audience. The labyrinth best expresses that proceeding by successive choices, coming and going, and sometimes retracing one's steps, typical of the debate activity. The basic thesis is that arguing is a continuous adaptation of one's speeches according to the audience that listens. In fact, in the labyrinth, what matters is not only arriving at the outcome - the exit or reaching the center of the structure - but the path you choose to get there is equally important. More than the definitive and winning argument, which rarely occurs in discussions, the labyrinth teaches us to recognise the plurality of approaches adopted when faced with an issue.

  • Keywords:
  • Argumentation Theory,
  • debate,
  • rhetoric,
+ Show More

Stephen M. Llano

St. John’s University, United States

  1. Bitzer, L. F. 1968. “The Rhetorical Situation.” Philosophy & Rhetoric 1: 1-14.
  2. Burke, K. 1969. A Grammar of Motives. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
  3. Ehninger, D., and W. Brockriede (1971). Decision by debate (1st Ed). New York: Harper & Row.
  4. Keith, W. M. 2007. Democracy as Discussion: Civic Education and the American Forum Movement. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
  5. Mercier, H., and D. Sperber. 2017. The Enigma of Reason. Cambridge-Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  6. O’Neill, J. M. 1915a. “A Disconcerted Editor and Others.” Quarterly Journal of Public Speaking 1(1): 79-84.
  7. O’Neill, J. M. 1915b. “Able Non-Debaters.” Quarterly Journal of Public Speaking 2(1): 197-207.
  8. Potter, D. 1944. Debating in the Colonial Chartered Colleges. New York: Teacher’s College of Columbia University.
  9. Poulakos, J. 1995. Sophistical Rhetoric in Classical Greece. SC: University of South Carolina Press Columbia.
  10. Ranciere, J. 1991. The Ignorant Schoolmaster. CA: Stanford University Press, Stanford.
  11. Ray, A. G. 2004. “The Permeable Public: Rituals of Citizenship in Antebellum Men’s Debating Clubs.” Argumentation & Advocacy 41(1): 1-16.
  12. Sprague, R. K. 1972. The Older Sophists. Inc, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Co.
  13. Tannen, D. 1998. The Argument Culture: Stopping America’s War of Words. New York: Ballantine Books.
  14. Vatz, R. E. 1973. “The Myth of the Rhetorical Situation.” Philosophy & Rhetoric 3(6): 154-61.
  15. Walker, J. 2011. The Genuine Teachers of This Art: Rhetorical Education in Antiquity. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
PDF
  • Publication Year: 2021
  • Pages: 43-54
  • Content License: CC BY 4.0
  • © 2021 Author(s)

XML
  • Publication Year: 2021
  • Content License: CC BY 4.0
  • © 2021 Author(s)

Chapter Information

Chapter Title

A Rhetorical Model of Debating

Authors

Stephen M. Llano

Language

English

DOI

10.36253/978-88-5518-329-1.05

Peer Reviewed

Publication Year

2021

Copyright Information

© 2021 Author(s)

Content License

CC BY 4.0

Metadata License

CC0 1.0

Table of Contents

Book Title

Competing, cooperating, deciding: towards a model of deliberative debate

Editors

Adelino Cattani, Bruno Mastroianni

Peer Reviewed

Number of Pages

168

Publication Year

2021

Copyright Information

© 2021 Author(s)

Content License

CC BY 4.0

Metadata License

CC0 1.0

Publisher Name

Firenze University Press

DOI

10.36253/978-88-5518-329-1

ISBN Print

978-88-5518-328-4

eISBN (pdf)

978-88-5518-329-1

Series Title

Communication and Philosophical Cultures. Researches and Instruments

38

Fulltext
downloads

66

Views

Export Citation

1,187

Open Access Books

in the Catalogue

886

Book Chapters

1,824,767

Fulltext
downloads

2,627

Authors

from 520 Research Institutions

of 51 Nations

50

scientific boards

from 276 Research Institutions

of 39 Nations

786

Referees

from 187 Research Institutions

of 32 Nations