Scientific futures for a Rhetoric of Science: "We do this and they do that?" A Junior-Senior Scholar Session, RSA 2018, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA; 1 June 2018

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftKonferenceartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Standard

Scientific futures for a Rhetoric of Science : "We do this and they do that?" A Junior-Senior Scholar Session, RSA 2018, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA; 1 June 2018. / Gruber, David R; Harris, Randy.

I: POROI, Bind 14, Nr. 2, 2019, s. 1-13.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftKonferenceartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Gruber, DR & Harris, R 2019, 'Scientific futures for a Rhetoric of Science: "We do this and they do that?" A Junior-Senior Scholar Session, RSA 2018, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA; 1 June 2018', POROI, bind 14, nr. 2, s. 1-13. https://doi.org/10.13008/2151-2957.1282

APA

Gruber, D. R., & Harris, R. (2019). Scientific futures for a Rhetoric of Science: "We do this and they do that?" A Junior-Senior Scholar Session, RSA 2018, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA; 1 June 2018. POROI, 14(2), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.13008/2151-2957.1282

Vancouver

Gruber DR, Harris R. Scientific futures for a Rhetoric of Science: "We do this and they do that?" A Junior-Senior Scholar Session, RSA 2018, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA; 1 June 2018. POROI. 2019;14(2):1-13. https://doi.org/10.13008/2151-2957.1282

Author

Gruber, David R ; Harris, Randy. / Scientific futures for a Rhetoric of Science : "We do this and they do that?" A Junior-Senior Scholar Session, RSA 2018, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA; 1 June 2018. I: POROI. 2019 ; Bind 14, Nr. 2. s. 1-13.

Bibtex

@inproceedings{42de078b01e64d48827c5c90ef7d7dad,
title = "Scientific futures for a Rhetoric of Science: {"}We do this and they do that?{"} A Junior-Senior Scholar Session, RSA 2018, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA; 1 June 2018",
abstract = "Growing attention to a rift between epistemology and ontology, between words and things, sets new challenges and invigorations for a Rhetoric of Science that traditionally aims to “analyze and evaluate the persuasive communications of scientists” (Ceccarelli, 2017, para 6). Rhetoricians confront a vibrant, new intellectual space where scholars across disciplines are seeking to better account for bodies and moving to “include the materiality of our ambient environs” in their analyses (Rickert, 2013, p. x). The question, in light of material expansions, is what is a Rhetoric of Science, and what are its futures?In response to the Rhetoric Society of America’s 2018 conference call for junior and senior scholars to discuss “major developments in rhetorical studies,” we offer a Feyerabendian innovation-meets-dogma performative session: the junior scholar, representing innovation, argues that Rhetoric of Science must move aggressively beyond a study of texts and scientific language to account for continuous technological, social, and biological entanglements; specifically, to expand the field’s practices to include neuro-cognitive approaches and other forms of experiment. The senior scholar, representing dogma, expresses caution, arguing that the domain of a Rhetoric of Science is still symbols and semiosis; specifically, that looking at “ambient rhetorics” and “entanglements” is another approach, not a foundational shift.",
keywords = "Faculty of Humanities, entanglement, junior senior scholar, bodies, futures, Materiality, Rhetoric of Science",
author = "Gruber, {David R} and Randy Harris",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.13008/2151-2957.1282",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "1--13",
journal = "POROI",
issn = "2151-2957",
publisher = "University of Iowa Libraries",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - GEN

T1 - Scientific futures for a Rhetoric of Science

T2 - "We do this and they do that?" A Junior-Senior Scholar Session, RSA 2018, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA; 1 June 2018

AU - Gruber, David R

AU - Harris, Randy

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Growing attention to a rift between epistemology and ontology, between words and things, sets new challenges and invigorations for a Rhetoric of Science that traditionally aims to “analyze and evaluate the persuasive communications of scientists” (Ceccarelli, 2017, para 6). Rhetoricians confront a vibrant, new intellectual space where scholars across disciplines are seeking to better account for bodies and moving to “include the materiality of our ambient environs” in their analyses (Rickert, 2013, p. x). The question, in light of material expansions, is what is a Rhetoric of Science, and what are its futures?In response to the Rhetoric Society of America’s 2018 conference call for junior and senior scholars to discuss “major developments in rhetorical studies,” we offer a Feyerabendian innovation-meets-dogma performative session: the junior scholar, representing innovation, argues that Rhetoric of Science must move aggressively beyond a study of texts and scientific language to account for continuous technological, social, and biological entanglements; specifically, to expand the field’s practices to include neuro-cognitive approaches and other forms of experiment. The senior scholar, representing dogma, expresses caution, arguing that the domain of a Rhetoric of Science is still symbols and semiosis; specifically, that looking at “ambient rhetorics” and “entanglements” is another approach, not a foundational shift.

AB - Growing attention to a rift between epistemology and ontology, between words and things, sets new challenges and invigorations for a Rhetoric of Science that traditionally aims to “analyze and evaluate the persuasive communications of scientists” (Ceccarelli, 2017, para 6). Rhetoricians confront a vibrant, new intellectual space where scholars across disciplines are seeking to better account for bodies and moving to “include the materiality of our ambient environs” in their analyses (Rickert, 2013, p. x). The question, in light of material expansions, is what is a Rhetoric of Science, and what are its futures?In response to the Rhetoric Society of America’s 2018 conference call for junior and senior scholars to discuss “major developments in rhetorical studies,” we offer a Feyerabendian innovation-meets-dogma performative session: the junior scholar, representing innovation, argues that Rhetoric of Science must move aggressively beyond a study of texts and scientific language to account for continuous technological, social, and biological entanglements; specifically, to expand the field’s practices to include neuro-cognitive approaches and other forms of experiment. The senior scholar, representing dogma, expresses caution, arguing that the domain of a Rhetoric of Science is still symbols and semiosis; specifically, that looking at “ambient rhetorics” and “entanglements” is another approach, not a foundational shift.

KW - Faculty of Humanities

KW - entanglement

KW - junior senior scholar

KW - bodies, futures

KW - Materiality

KW - Rhetoric of Science

U2 - 10.13008/2151-2957.1282

DO - 10.13008/2151-2957.1282

M3 - Conference article

VL - 14

SP - 1

EP - 13

JO - POROI

JF - POROI

SN - 2151-2957

IS - 2

ER -

ID: 223622063