Material Rhetoric
Spreading Stones and Showing Bones in the Study of Prehistory
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 4516167 |
|---|---|
| Autores | David Van Reybrouck (KU Leuven), Raf De Bont (0000-0002-2121-8047, KU Leuven), Jan Rock (University of Amsterdam) |
| Año | 2009 |
| Volumen | 22 |
| Número | 2 |
| Páginas | 195-216 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2009-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Science in Context (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 0269-8897 • E-ISSN: 1474-0664 |
| Editorial | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0269889709002208 |
| PMID | 19827370 |
| OpenAlex | W2081355344 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 6 |
| Referencias citadas | 17 |
ArgumentSince the linguistic turn, the role of rhetoric in the circulation and the popular representation of knowledge has been widely accepted in science studies. This article aims to analyze not a textual form of scientific rhetoric, but the crucial role of materiality in scientific debates. It introduces the concept ofmaterial rhetoricto understand the promotional regimes in which material objects play an essential argumentative role. It analyzes the phenomenon by looking at two students of prehistory from nineteenth-century Belgium.In the study of human prehistory and evolution, material data are either fairly abundant stone tools or very scarce fossil bones. These two types of material data stand for two different strategies in material rhetoric. In this article, the first strategy is exemplified by Aimé Rutot, who gathered great masses of eoliths (crudely chipped stones which he believed to be prehistoric tools). The second strategy is typified by the example of Julien Fraipont, who based his scientific career on only two Neanderthal skeletons. Rutot sent his "artifacts" to a very wide audience, while Fraipont showed his skeletons to only a few selected scholars. Unlike Rutot, however, Fraipont was able to monitor his audience's interpretation of the finds by means of personal contacts. What an archaeologist gains in reach, he or she apparently loses in control. In this article we argue that only those scholars who find the right balance between the extremes of reach and control will prove to be successful
Aesthetics · Archaeology · Art · Biology · Epistemology · Linguistics · Literature · Phenomenon · Political science · Politics · Prehistory · Rhetoric · Sociology · Historical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis · History · History of Science and Medicine · History of Science and Natural History · Law · Philosophy
Héroe por un día. Jules Reboux en el crisol de la prehistoria en el Paris de 1860
Dispositivos para la enseñanza de la naturaleza. Tecnología y modernidad en los colegios argentinos de finales del siglo XIX
Palaeoliths and Pareidolia
An Experimental Approach to Understanding the “Eolithic” Problem
From Savagery to Sovereignty
Estudiar la cultura material de la educación científica en la Argentina
Narratives of human evolution
Science in action
The Wider Domain of Evolutionary Thought
Ancestral Images
In search of the Neanderthals
Forbidden Archeology
Inalienable Possessions
Bones and Devices in the Constitution of Paleontology in Argentina at the End of the Nineteenth Century
The Emergence of a Visual Language for Geological Science 1760-1840
The Creation of Prehistoric Man
Boule's error
Archaeological illustrations
American archaeology
Imaging and imagining the Neanderthal
American Archaeology Past and Future
| Obras citantes distintas | 6 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 0,46 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2013 - 2024 (12) |
| Velocidad de citación | recent |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 4 |