The Excellence Award at the Fonds Ricœur’s Summer Workshop 2021 - “Ricœur rhétorique. The Missed Encounter with Chaïm Perelman in The Rule of Metaphor”
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 22005457 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Blake D Scott (0000-0002-0727-3330, KU Leuven, autor correspondente) |
| Ano | 2021 |
| Volume | 12 |
| Fascículo | 2 |
| Páginas | 102-119 |
| Data de publicação | 2021-12-15 |
| Open Access | Sim |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Études Ricoeuriennes / Ricoeur Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 2156-7808 • E-ISSN: 2156-7808 |
| Editora | University Library System, University of Pittsburgh (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.5195/errs.2021.575 |
| OpenAlex | W4200301693 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 1 |
| Referências citadas | 2 |
This paper argues that Ricœur’s philosophy operates on the basis of a more expansive conception of rhetoric than it first appears. To show this, I reread The Rule of Metaphor through the “new rhetoric” of Chaïm Perelman. First, I survey Ricœur’s understanding of rhetoric in the 1950s and 60s. Second, I examine Ricœur’s relation to Perelman within the context of the broader “rhetorical turn” of the 1970s. After examining their respective positions, I argue that Ricœur fails to appreciate the full significance of Perelman’s conception of audience. In doing so, I draw attention to the central role that Ricœur himself ascribes to the audience or reader in the “work of meaning.” I conclude by proposing that the rhetorical triad of logos/ethos/pathos may serve as a conceptual matrix with which the rhetorical aspects of Ricœur’s philosophy can be interpreted
Aesthetics · Art · Epistemology · Ethos · Excellence · Linguistics · Literature · Logos Bible Software · Metaphor · Pathos · Rhetoric · Rhetorical question · Sociology · Theology · Education, Leadership, and Health Research · Hermeneutics and Narrative Identity · History · Philosophy · Translation Studies and Practices
| Citações por ano | 0,2 |
|---|---|
| Intervalo de citações | 2021 - 2021 (1) |
| Altamente citado | Não |