Rhetorical Perspectivism in Education - Essay Example

?Rhetorical Perspectivism in Education Introduction Acquisition of knowledge in education is not a mere ‘transfer’ of ideas of the to his learners. In order to let real learning take place, there should be a development of questioning minds and consequently, critical thinking should be a habit. In the light of new perspectives in education, there has been transformations of ideas as to how learners acquire what they know, and how they respond to the things that they have learned. Richard Cherwitz and James Hikins formulated a principle called “rhetorical perspectivism;” a meeting of the areas of creative communication and philosophy which is essential in the field of education. Rhetorical perspectivism, as union of communication and Philosophy, postulates that in practicing this stance, there would be a balanced objectivity when it comes to the openness of a person’s mind towards ideas opposing his own thought, and is vital in acquiring unbiased learning. Rhetorics and Perspectivism Rhetorics and perspectivism were once separate ideologies. The art of rhetorics can be traced back to the age of oratorical speeches in Ancient Greece. According to Cline (2010), Greeks of long ago wondered about language, and this curiosity has led to the “realization, coming from collective political arrangements” that spoken and written language “had very real effects towards the polis.” This idea is parallel to Aristotle’s view which states that rhetorics is “a means of persuasion” and makes it as a unique form of art (as Cited in Xiuguo, 2005). It is believed that rhetorics is practiced the way it is because Greeks who could afford education primarily want to learn how “to speak with authority” for future involvement in the state affairs or Politics (Cline, 2010). Nowadays, rhetorics is seen as a way to “coordinate social action” in response to an influence of an opinion (Xiuguo, 2005). Perspectivism, on the other hand, is more related to the area of Philosophy. The tenets of perspectivism were conceptualized by Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, where his core assumption argues that there is no absolute truth. However, other contemporary philosophers questioned the “truthfulness” of Nietzsche’s concept. Clark (n.d.) argues that if Nietzsche’s claim is true, then no philosopher could assure the validity of their assumption, and even Nietzsche’s idea would negate itself (as cited in Olson, n.d.). However, Olson (n.d.) was able to resolve this dilemma by treating Nietzsche’s concept as “the best way to live one’s life in the absence of an absolute truth.” Nietzsche’s perspectivism may have been the mother concept of the old phrase: “the truth at the other side of the table.” Both rhetorics and perspectivism, although different, have their own seats in the room of education. Basically, the two are treated as separate fields of concern, where rhetorics is categorized along with the other pillars of public speaking and perspectivism in the area of philosophy. However, rhetorical perspectivism shifts the normal treatment of both subjects is inter-related bodies of knowledge which are specifically helpful in the area of education, with respect to the different learning strategies of each student. Olson (n.d.) promotes open-mindedness as the main thought of Nietzsche’s perspectivism, and thus, it plays a critical role in the field of debate and argumentation; activities where rhetorics is strongly related. At this point, one can see the vague line connecting the two disciplines which could possibly be the key of unraveling the ideas of Cherwitz and Hikins and the birth of rhetorical perspectivism. Cherwitz and Hikins denounce subjectivity and intersubjectivity in rhetorical perspectivism, since it is much like weighing all sides of an argument rather than sticking to one’s belief as indispensable truth. Rhetorical Perspectivism and its Role in Education Lucaites, Condit, and Cuadill (1999) contend that rhetorical perspectivism has a role to portray in the acquisition of knowledge through rhetoric. In their book Contemporary rhetorical theory: A reader, Cherwitz and Hikins theory is divided into three postulates where it summarizes the thoughts concerning rhetorical perspectivism. The first postulate recognizes the “independence of reality” from our own point of experiences, “attitudes, beliefs and values.” The term “independence of reality” is also adapted by the Scottish philosopher David Hume, who believed that “if reality depends upon the knower, then the world becomes the shadow of inexplicable mysterious relation--the relation of knowing” (as cited in British Institute of Philosophy, British Institute of Philosophical Studies, and Royal Institute of Philosophy, 2008). Hume acknowledges the difference of reality for each individual and therefore is independent from each other. In the education context, such claim poses truth in a way that it is imperative for an instructor to acknowledge differences of ideas among learners. The theory of multiple intelligences in the classroom setting may exemplify further Hume’s claim. A student with strong linguistic proclivity may manifest talent in the art of rhetorics, however, this does not mean that it would alienate other forms of intelligences from rhetorical perspectivism. Going back to Xiuguo’s (2005) definition of rhetorics, it is the management of ‘symbols’ to ‘coordinate social action.’ The word ‘symbol’ in Xiuguo’s statement would mean “system of signs that is referential,” where music, painting, mathematical and others are included. This means to say that rhetorics is not limited to the use of words to persuade, giving way to the other forms of intelligences. The second postulate centers on relationality which states that independent knowledge “emerge as a whole” and has a particular purpose on the other perspectives without losing the quality of individuality. Hikins and Cherwitz (2010) argues that “reality is ultimately grounded...more fundamental ontological progenitor” which refers to relation. In education, group dynamics magnifies this postulate. Each member of the group has a particular task to do for the group, and such task will not be made if it is not needed in the output. For example, group leaders are, by themselves, the head of the group; however his role would not take effect if he has no followers. For an effective leader to take place, openness to ideas is required; a point much related to rhetorical perspectivism. In this case, discourse becomes more important for the leaders and followers to embellish the common ideas and come up with a more logical and in-depth analysis of a certain concept. According to Hikins and Cherwitz (2010), the 21st Century educational institutions are concerned about engagement. Although it is not easy to implement, they have found out that ‘discourse’ is a major element in pursuing it, and that “discourse creates reality” (Higgins, 1986, as cited in Hikins and Cherwitz, 2010). Consciousness also gives value to the definition of rhetorical perspectivism. Hikins and Cherwitz (2010) contend that consciousness is the immediate element to respond to different relationalities; where one entity is aware of the presence and influence of other entities (conscious relation). At this state, it is noteworthy that consciousness exists in relationality, much so with engagement. This concept is somehow parallel to Dewey, Lewin, and Piaget’s experiential learning where the learner relates knowledge directly to past experiences, and consequently, if the learner thinks he can relate to the activity, the bigger chances for him to engage to that activity. The light of rhetorical perspectivism states that the world is a complex field of inter-relationality, where despite of it does not violates the parameters of independent knowledge; this is to point out that “real world knowledge” cannot be solved without engagement. It is vital for teachers to acknowledge that once learners engage himself in a situation, they would have different assessments and realizations which were largely affected by their past experiences. On a personal note, education in the presence of rhetorical perspectivism brings objectivity at its fullest notwithstanding the efforts to personally relate to various knowledge. Especially on the topics of relationality and consciousness, the theory is much agreeable with my own perspective in education. For example, it is impossible to think of an idea which separates itself from all other concepts, knowing that new concepts are either offshoots or revisions of older thoughts. However, newer concepts are independent from other concepts in a way that it would provoke thoughts using its own nature and definition. Being exposed to a multicultural classroom, I regard rhetorical perspectivism to be an old notion that has been put into words rather than an ultimately new theory. The praxis is common on a day to day basis ranging from simple student activities to the extensive class discussion and engagement. Each student is entitled to his own views of the matter and provoking their classmates’ thoughts to formulate new concepts basing on a core idea. Conclusion Rhetorical perspectivism explores knowledge acquisition in all sides. Its essentiality in education would be applicable to lesson planning and syllabus making, or in a larger context, the formulation of the curriculum. It is vital in knowing what teachers would want their students to learn in the ways that the students are comfortable doing. On the other hand, the praxis rhetorical perspectivism is one way of initiating multiculturalism as a new trend in education. Furthermore, being able to acknowledge knowledge as an independent body would most likely pursue the development of other theories, and thus, removing all possibilities of limitations of knowledge in such a way that research would always be dynamic. References British Institute of Philosophy, British Institute of Philosophical Studies, & Royal Institute of Philosophy. (2008). The self and perceptions: A study in Humean philosophy. The Philosophical Quarterly, 9 (35), 27-115. Cline, A.R. (2010). A brief history of Ancient Greek rhetoric. Retrieved from http://rhetorica.net/textbook/greek.htm Hikins, J.W., & Cherwitz, R.A. (2010). The engaged university: Where rhetorical theory matters. Journal of Applied Communications Research, 2 (38), 115-126. Lucaites, J.L., Condit, C.M., & Caudill, S. (1999). Rhetorical perspectivism. In Contemporary rhetorical theory: A reader (176-193). New York: The Guilford Press. Olson, N., (n.d.). Perspectivism and truth in Nietzsche’s philosophy: A critical look at the apparent contradiction. Retrieved from http://www.stolaf.edu/depts/philosophy/reed/2001/perspectivism.html Xiuguo, Zhang. (2005). What is rhetoric? In English rhetoric (xvi-xxv). Beijing: Tsinghua University Press. Read More