Rhetoric of technology

Last updated

The rhetoric of technology is both an object and field of study. It refers to the ways in which makers and consumers of technology talk about and make decisions regarding technology and also the influence that technology has on discourse. [1] [2] Studies of the rhetoric of technology are interdisciplinary. Scholars in communication, media ecology, and science studies research the rhetoric of technology. [2] Technical communication scholars are also concerned with the rhetoric of technology. [3]

Contents

The phrase "rhetoric of technology" gained prominence with rhetoricians in the 1970s, and the study developed in conjunction with interest in the rhetoric of science. [4] However, scholars have worked to maintain a distinction between the two fields. Rhetoric of technology criticism addresses several issues related to technology and employs many concepts, including several from the canon of classical rhetoric, for example ethos , but the field has also adopted contemporary approaches, such as new materialism.

Definition

While the definition and scope of rhetoric is contested, scholars in the discipline, or rhetoricians, study the capacity of symbols to create change and influence perspectives. [4] Often, rhetoricians study discourse and texts, but they also study objects. [5] Technology is both techniques and objects that embody and enact techniques. [2] Thus, rhetoric of technology scholars may look at texts and discourse associated with technology or techniques and technological objects. Concerns of rhetoric of technology include the influence of technology on public deliberation, conceptions of the self, and how new technologies come to be developed and adopted. [6] [7] [2]

Scholars who study rhetoric of technology have argued that it should be treated as distinct from the rhetoric of science. Charles Bazerman offers three distinctions between rhetoric of technology and rhetoric of science. First, unlike science, technology has always been intertwined with other clearly rhetorical endeavors, such as commerce and finance. Second, while the discourse of science often works towards specialization, the discourse of technology is pervasive. We may not all conduct experiments, but we all interact with and operate technology. Lastly, the products of technology are mostly material while the products of science are mostly symbols. [1] Carolyn Miller argues that rhetoric of science must be treated as distinct from rhetoric of technology because technology and science differ in motivation, criteria of judgment, and values. [6]

History

Scholars started to suggest the importance of studying rhetoric of technology in the 1970s alongside a growing interest in rhetoric of science. [4] Thomas W. Benson and Gerard A. Hauser referred to the "rhetoric of technology" in a book review published in 1973 and noted the shared concern of rhetoric and technology with technique. [8] In 1978 Carolyn Miller wrote “Technology as a Form of Consciousness: A Study of Contemporary Ethos.” In addition to explaining why rhetoric of technology should be treated separately from science, Miller argues that technology gives rise to a particular ethos, or personal character, because it generates particular actions and a particular consciousness. She concludes that technological consciousness assumes an objective perspective that erodes ethos. Within technological consciousness, actions are right or wrong regardless of cultural possibilities because assessments are assumed to be objective. [6]

In a series of oral histories collected by the Association for the Rhetoric of Science, Technology, and Medicine, scholars familiar with both fields recognized that there has been more research addressing the rhetoric of science than comparable work on technology. Carolyn Miller suggested that one reason for the relative lack of rhetoric of technology scholarship is that it is harder to find relevant texts to analyze. Miller noted that many of the primary texts dealing with technology are private company documents. [9]

Concepts

Materialism and New Materialism

In 1980 Langdon Winner wrote the article “Do Artifacts Have Politics?” Winner suggests that objects reflect and enact ideological perspectives. [10] Winner's idea shares much in common with a materialist approach to rhetoric of technology. Materialist approaches to rhetoric of technology are related to materialism and treat technological objects the same as they may treat a text by critiquing how objects persuade and influence. [2]

Jeremy Packer and Stephen B. Wiley provide an overview of new materialist approaches to rhetoric in their book Communication Matters: Materialist Approaches to Media. Packer and Wiley conceptualize materiality as a “corrective” to the concept of communication as intangible. They suggest that the corrective is in response to a “poststructuralist impasse” in the field of communication, rhetoric, and media studies. They outline two approaches to materiality: 1) to equate materiality with physicality and approach infrastructure, body, space, and technology as fields of communication and 2) to analyze the materiality of communication itself, the physiological, mechanical, or digital media of communication. Packer and Wiley also identify key themes that are explored in materialist approaches: economy, discourse, technology, space, and bodies. [5]

Ethos

In her 1978 article “Technology as a Form of Consciousness: A Study of Contemporary Ethos,” Carolyn Miller argued that technology was fundamentally changing how individuals judge personal character. She suggested that the ultimate result of a technological consciousness would be to erode a concern with ethos as technology would prevail in presenting actions and decision as objectively right or wrong. If all decisions are objective, then there is no longer a need for judgments of character. [6] In a 1992 article, Steven B. Katz employed Miller's "technological consciousness" to help explain the rhetoric used by members of the Nazi regime to enact the Holocaust. [11] In 2004, Miller revisited the relationship between ethos and technology in an exploration of the impact of human-computer interaction. She explores two modes of human-computer interaction: expert systems versus intelligent agents. She argues that in both modes of interaction subjectivity blurs between the human-user and the computer, creating a hybrid (borrowing from Bruno Latour) or cyborg (borrowing from Donna Haraway). Expert systems are designed to mimic human experts; they typically draw from a deep database of information. Intelligent agent computer systems, in contrast, learn from interacting with an environment. The merger between human and computer destabilizes ethos according to Miller. As the intelligent agent model of computing has grown in popularity, Miller suggests that there has been a shift from a logos-centric to a pathos-centric ethos. Neither, she contends, provide ethics, or arete, which is a gap that rhetoric should fill. [12]

Invention

As invention is important to the development of new technology, invention is also important to rhetoric. Along with arrangement, delivery, style, and memory, invention is one of the five canons of rhetoric, or the five key elements of a competent speech according to classic rhetorical theory. Therefore, some rhetoricians argue that the development of new technology is fundamentally rhetorical. John A. Lynch and William J. Kinsella describe how both technology and rhetoric are both concerned with creating something new from available resources and know-how. [2]

Kairos

Kairos is an ancient Greek word that captures the idea that there is a right time for action. Carolyn Miller has suggested that the "right time" is also a central concern for technology. She uses the Japanese "Fifth Generation" computer project as a case study. Miller contends that within technological discourse kairos is both a powerful theme and useful tool of analysis. She supports her claim with an analysis of technological forecasting, which was a central feature of the Japanese computer project, and concludes that technologists employ kairos to justify investment in particular technologies. [13]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rhetoric</span> Art of persuasion

Rhetoric is the art of persuasion. It is one of the three ancient arts of discourse (trivium) along with grammar and logic/dialectic. As an academic discipline within the humanities, rhetoric aims to study the techniques that speakers or writers use to inform, persuade, and motivate their audiences. Rhetoric also provides heuristics for understanding, discovering, and developing arguments for particular situations.

Genre is any form or type of communication in any mode with socially-agreed-upon conventions developed over time. In popular usage, it normally describes a category of literature, music, or other forms of art or entertainment, whether written or spoken, audio or visual, based on some set of stylistic criteria. Genres can be aesthetic, rhetorical, communicative, or functional. Genres form by conventions that change over time as cultures invent new genres and discontinue the use of old ones. Often, works fit into multiple genres by way of borrowing and recombining these conventions. Stand-alone texts, works, or pieces of communication may have individual styles, but genres are amalgams of these texts based on agreed-upon or socially inferred conventions. Some genres may have rigid, strictly adhered-to guidelines, while others may show great flexibility.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Communication theory</span> Proposed description of communication phenomena

Communication theory is a proposed description of communication phenomena, the relationships among them, a storyline describing these relationships, and an argument for these three elements. Communication theory provides a way of talking about and analyzing key events, processes, and commitments that together form communication. Theory can be seen as a way to map the world and make it navigable; communication theory gives us tools to answer empirical, conceptual, or practical communication questions.

<i>Kairos</i> Right or opportune moment

Kairos is an ancient Greek word meaning 'the right, critical, or opportune moment'. In modern Greek, kairos also means 'weather' or 'time'.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rhetorical criticism</span>

Rhetorical criticism analyzes the symbolic artifacts of discourse—the words, phrases, images, gestures, performances, texts, films, etc. that people use to communicate. Rhetorical analysis shows how the artifacts work, how well they work, and how the artifacts, as discourse, inform and instruct, entertain and arouse, and convince and persuade the audience; as such, discourse includes the possibility of morally improving the reader, the viewer, and the listener. Rhetorical criticism studies and analyzes the purpose of the words, sights, and sounds that are the symbolic artifacts used for communications among people.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Visual rhetoric</span> Communication through visual elements

Visual rhetoric is the art of effective communication through visual elements such as images, typography, and texts. Visual rhetoric encompasses the skill of visual literacy and the ability to analyze images for their form and meaning. Drawing on techniques from semiotics and rhetorical analysis, visual rhetoric expands on visual literacy as it examines the structure of an image with the focus on its persuasive effects on an audience.

Pathos appeals to the emotions and ideals of the audience and elicits feelings that already reside in them. Pathos is a term used most often in rhetoric, as well as in literature, film and other narrative art.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genre studies</span> Branch of general critical theory

Genre studies is an academic subject which studies genre theory as a branch of general critical theory in several different fields, including art, literature, linguistics, rhetoric and composition studies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Memoria</span>

Memoria was the term for aspects involving memory in Western classical rhetoric. The word is Latin, and can be translated as "memory".

A discourse community is a group of people who share a set of discourses, understood as basic values and assumptions, and ways of communicating about those goals. Linguist John Swales defined discourse communities as "groups that have goals or purposes, and use communication to achieve these goals."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Digital rhetoric</span> Forms of communication via digital mediums

Digital rhetoric can be generally defined as communication that exists in the digital sphere. As such, digital rhetoric can be expressed in many different forms, including text, images, videos, and software. Due to the increasingly mediated nature of our contemporary society, there are no longer clear distinctions between digital and non-digital environments. This has expanded the scope of digital rhetoric to account for the increased fluidity with which humans interact with technology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rhetoric of science</span>

Rhetoric of science is a body of scholarly literature exploring the notion that the practice of science is a rhetorical activity. It emerged after a number of similarly oriented topics of research and discussion during the late 20th century, including the sociology of scientific knowledge, history of science, and philosophy of science, but it is practiced most typically by rhetoricians in academic departments of English, speech, and communication.

John Louis Lucaites is an American academic. He is a professor emeritus of rhetoric and public culture at Indiana University. In 2012, Lucaites was appointed as associate dean for arts and humanities and undergraduate education at Indiana University. His research concerns the general relationship between rhetoric and social theory, and seeks to contribute in particular to the critique and reconstruction of liberalism in contemporary social, political, and cultural practices in the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genre criticism</span>

Genre criticism is a method within rhetorical criticism that analyzes texts in terms of their genre: the set of generic expectations, conventions, and constraints that guide their production and interpretation. In rhetoric, the theory of genre provides a means to classify and compare artifacts in terms of their formal, substantive and contextual features. By grouping artifacts with others which have similar formal features or rhetorical exigencies, rhetorical critics can shed light on how authors use or flout conventions for their own purposes. Genre criticism has thus become one of the main methodologies within rhetorical criticism.

Rhetorical stance refers to the deliberate choices made by a communicator in shaping and presenting their message. It encompasses the strategic decisions regarding language, style, and tone that are employed to achieve a specific communicative purpose. This concept is deeply rooted in rhetorical theory and is a fundamental aspect of effective communication across various disciplines, including literature, public speaking, and academic writing.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Charles Bazerman</span> American educator and scholar

Charles Bazerman is an American educator and scholar. He was born and raised in New York. He has contributed significantly to the establishment of writing as a research field, as evidenced by the collection of essays written by international scholars in Writing as A Human Activity: Implications and Applications of the Work of Charles Bazerman. Best known for his work on genre studies and the rhetoric of science, he is a Professor of Education at the University of California, Santa Barbara, where he also served as Chair of the Program in Education for eight years. He served as Chair of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, delivering the 2009 CCCC Chair's Address, "The Wonders of Writing," in San Francisco, California. He is the author of over 18 books, including Shaping Written Knowledge, Constructing Experiences, The Languages of Edison’s Light, A Theory of Literate Action, and a Rhetoric of Literate Action. He also edited over 20 volumes, including Textual Dynamics of the Profession, Writing Selves/Writing Societies, What Writing Does and How it Does It, as well as the Handbook of Research on Writing and the two series Rhetoric, Knowledge and Society and Reference Guides to Rhetoric and Composition. He also wrote textbooks supporting the integration of reading and writing that have appeared in over 30 editions and versions including The informed writer: Using sources in the disciplines, The Informed Reader, and the English Skills Handbook.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rhetorical situation</span> Context of a rhetorical event

The rhetorical situation is an event that consists of an issue, an audience, and a set of constraints. A rhetorical situation arises from a given context or exigence. An article by Lloyd Bitzer introduced the model of the rhetorical situation in 1968, which was later challenged and modified by Richard E. Vatz (1973) and Scott Consigny (1974). More recent scholarship has further redefined the model to include more expansive views of rhetorical operations and ecologies.

Rhetorical velocity is a term originating from the fields of Composition Studies and Rhetoric used to describe how rhetoricians may strategically theorize and anticipate the third party recomposition of their texts. In their 2009 article "Composing for Recomposition: Rhetorical Velocity and Delivery" in Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy, Professors Jim Ridolfo and Dànielle Nicole DeVoss provide the example of a writer delivering a press release, where the writer of the release rhetorically anticipates the positive and negative ways in which the text may be recomposed into other texts, including news articles, blog posts, and video content. It is similar to having something go viral. Author, Sean Morey, agrees in his book "The Digital Writer" that rhetorical velocity is the way in which a creator predicts how the audience will make use of their original work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rhetoric of health and medicine</span>

The rhetoric of health and medicine is an academic discipline concerning language and symbols in health and medicine. Rhetoric most commonly refers to the persuasive element in human interactions and is often best studied in the specific situations in which it occurs. As a subfield of rhetoric, medical rhetoric specifically analyzes and evaluates the structure, delivery, and intention of communications messages in medicine- and health-related contexts. Primary topics of focus includes patient-physician communication, health literacy, language that constructs disease knowledge, and pharmaceutical advertising. The general research areas are described below. Medical rhetoric is a more focused subfield of the rhetoric of science.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Carolyn Miller</span> American academic

Carolyn Rae Miller is SAS Institute Distinguished Professor of Rhetoric and Technical Communication Emerita at North Carolina State University. In 2006 she won the Rigo Award for Lifetime Achievement in Communication Design from the ACM-SIGDOC and in 2016 the Cheryl Geisler Award for Outstanding Mentor, the Rhetoric Society of America. She is a Fellow of the Association of Teachers of Technical Writing (1995) and of the Rhetoric Society of America (2010). Her “groundbreaking and influential article” on “Genre as Social Action” is foundational for Rhetorical Genre Studies. Three of her articles have been identified as essential works in Technical Communication.

References

  1. 1 2 Bazerman, Charles (1998). "The Production of Technology and the Production of Human Meaning". Journal of Business and Technical Communication. 12:3 (3): 381–387. doi:10.1177/1050651998012003006. S2CID   62551692.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Lynch, John A; Kinsella, William J. (2013). "The Rhetoric of Technology as a Rhetorical Technology". Poroi. 9 (1): 1–6. doi: 10.13008/2151-2957.1152 . ISSN   2151-2957.
  3. Durack, Katherine (1997). "Gender, Technology, and the History of Technical Communication". Technical Communication Quarterly. 6:3 (3): 249–260. doi:10.1207/s15427625tcq0603_2.
  4. 1 2 3 The Prospect of rhetoric; report of the national developmental project, sponsored by Speech Communication Association. Bitzer, Lloyd F.,, Black, Edwin, 1929-, Wallace, Karl Richards, 1905-1973., Speech Communication Association., National Conference on Rhetoric (1970 : St. Charles, Ill.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. 1971. ISBN   0137313314. OCLC   198203.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  5. 1 2 Communication matters : materialist approaches to media, mobility and networks. Packer, Jeremy., Wiley, Stephen B. Crofts. London: Routledge. 2011. ISBN   9780415782241. OCLC   694393761.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  6. 1 2 3 4 Miller, Carolyn (1978). "Technology as a Form of Consciousness: A Study of Contemporary Ethos". Central States Speech Journal. 29:4 (4): 228–236. doi:10.1080/10510977809367983.
  7. Charles., Bazerman (1999). The languages of Edison's light. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. ISBN   0262523264. OCLC   42922325.
  8. Benson, Thomas W.; Hauser, Gerard A. (1973). "Ideals, superlatives, and the decline of hypocrisy". Quarterly Journal of Speech. 59:1: 99–105. doi:10.1080/00335637309383157.
  9. ARSTonline (2013-06-24), ARST Oral History Project--An Interview with Dr. Carolyn Miller , retrieved 2018-02-21
  10. Winner, Langdon (Winter 1980). "Do Artifacts Have Politics?". Daedalus. 109 (1, Modern Technology: Problem or Opportunity?): 121–136.
  11. Katz, Steven B. (1992). "The Ethic of Expediency: Classical Rhetoric, Technology, and the Holocaust". College English. 54 (3): 255–75. doi:10.2307/378062. JSTOR   378062.
  12. Miller, Carolyn (2004). "Expertise and Agency: Transformations of Ethos in Human-Computer Interaction". In Hyde, Michael J. (ed.). The Ethos of Rhetoric. Columbia, S.C.: University of South Carolina Press. pp. 197–218.
  13. Miller, Carolyn (1994). "Opportunity, Opportunism, and Progress: Kairos in the Rhetoric of Technology". Argumentation. 8:1: 81–96. doi:10.1007/BF00710705. S2CID   144819973.

Bibliography