Rhetoric of science is a body of scholarly literature exploring the notion that the practice of science as 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.
Overview Rhetoric is best known as a discipline that studies the means and ends (i.e., methods and goals) of persuasion. Science, meanwhile, is typically considered to be the discovery and recording of knowledge about nature. A major contention of the rhetoric of science is that the practice of science itself is, to varying degrees, persuasive. The study of science from the viewpoint of rhetoric variously examines modes of inquiry, logic, argumentation, the ethos of scientific practitioners, the structures of scientific publications, and the character of scientific discourse and debates.
For instance, scientists must convince their community of scientists that their research is based on sound scientific method. In terms of rhetoric, the scientific method involves problem-solution topoi (the materials of discourse) that demonstrate observational and experimental competence (arrangement or order of discourse or method), and as a means of persuasion, offer explanatory and predictive power.Lawrence J. Prelli (1989) A Rhetoric of Science: Inventing Scientific Discourse, University of South Carolina Press Experimental competence is itself a persuasive topos. Rhetoric of science is a practice of suasion that is an outgrowth of some of the canons of rhetoric.
History Since its flourishing during the 1970s, rhetoric of science has contributed to a shift of opinions concerning science to include the claim that there is not any single scientific method, but rather a plurality of methods or styles.
The rhetoric of science has included various sub-topics, as indicated by these examples. John Angus Campbell has studied the works of Charles Darwin with the intention of showing Darwin's rhetorical manipulations and strategic use of the social beliefs of his time.John Angus Campbell (1986) Scientific revolution and the grammar culture: The case of Darwin's origin, Quarterly Journal of Speech, 72:4, 351-376. Carolyn Miller has emphasized genres within technology and the influence of technology on genre change.Carolyn Miller (2018). “Genre in Ancient and Networked Media.” Ancient Rhetorics & Digital Networks, ed. Michelle Kennerly and Damien Smith Pfister. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press. 176–204. Jeanne Fahnestock has identified the use of classical rhetoric in scientific reasoning and argument.Jeanne Fahnestock (1999). Rhetorical figures in science. Oxford University Press. Greg Myers has studied how scientific publications, grants, and other scientific texts are the result of social processesGreg Myers (1990). Writing Biology: Texts in the Social Construction of Scientific Knowledge. University of Wisconsin Press. and the pragmatics of politeness in scientific discussions.Greg Myers (1989). The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied linguistics 10, 1, 1-35.
Charles Bazerman's examination of the evolution of the varieties of writing characterized as experimental report through the first century and a half of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, the formation of social roles and norms concerning the publication of this journal, the Physical Review since its founding in 1893, and the evolution of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, along with scrutiny of works by Newton and Compton, and an analysis of the reading habits of physicists indicate the many social, organizational, ideological, political, theoretical, methodological, evidentiary, intertextual and intellectual factors that have influenced the character of writing and rhetoric.C. Bazerman (1988). Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.C. Bazerman (1991). How natural philosophers can cooperate: The rhetorical technology of coordinated research in Joseph Priestley's History and Present State of Electricity. In C. Bazerman & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions (pp. 13-44). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Bazerman's work has built upon these studies to consider the way knowledge is methodically produced and communicatively circulated in various activity systems.C. Bazerman (1999). The languages of Edison’s light. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.C. Bazerman (2009). How does science come to speak in the courts? citations, intertexts, expert witnesses, consequential facts and reasoning. Law and Contemporary Problems, 72(1), 91-120. His work follows the lead of Ludwik Fleck on Thought Collectives and thought styles, structuration theory and phenomenology.
Other rhetoricians consider the rhetoric of science effectively beginning with Thomas Kuhn'sThe Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962). Kuhn first examines "normal" science, that is, practices which he considered routine, patterned and accessible with a specific method of problem-solving. Normal science advances by building on past knowledge, through the accretion of further discoveries in a knowledge base. Kuhn then contrasts normal science with "revolutionary" science (new science marked by a paradigm shift in thought). When Kuhn began to teach Harvard undergraduates historical texts such as Aristotle's writings on motion, he examined case studies, and sought first to understand Aristotle in his own time, and then to locate his problems and solutions within a wider context of contemporary thought and actions. Nickles, Thomas (2003) "Normal Science: From Logic to Case-Based and Model-Based Reasoning", in Thomas Kuhn, edited by Thomas Nickles, Cambridge University Press That is to say, Kuhn sought first to understand the traditions and established practices of science. In this instance, Michael Polanyi's influence on Kuhn becomes apparent; that is, his acknowledgement of the importance of inherited practices and rejection of absolute objectivity. Observing the changes in scientific thought and practices, Kuhn concluded that revolutionary changes happen through the defining notion of rhetoric: persuasion.Harris, Randy Allen (1997) "Introduction", Landmark Essays on Rhetoric of Science: Case Studies, editor Randy Allen Harris, Mahwah: Hermagoras Press The critical work of Herbert W. Simons – "Are Scientists Rhetors in Disguise?" in Rhetoric in Transition (1980) – and subsequent works show that Kuhn's Structure is fully rhetorical.
The work of Thomas Kuhn was extended by Richard Rorty (1979, 1989), and this work was to prove fruitful in defining the means and ends of rhetoric in scientific discourse (Jasinski "Intro" xvi). Rorty, who invented the phrase "rhetorical turn", was also interested in assessing periods of scientific stability and instability.
Another component of the shift in science that occurred during the past concerns the claim that there is no single scientific method, but rather a plurality of methods or styles. Paul Feyerabend in Against Method (1975) contends that science has found no "method that turns ideologically contaminated ideas into true and useful theories", in other words; no special method exists that can guarantee the success of science (302).
As evidenced by the early theory papers after Kuhn's seminal work, the idea that rhetoric is crucial to science became much discussed. Quarterly journals in speech and rhetoric included much discussion of topics such as inquiry, logic, argument fields, ethos of scientific practitioners, argumentation, scientific text, and the character of scientific discourse and debates. Philip Wander (1976) observed, for instance, the phenomenal penetration of science (public science) in modern life. He labelled the obligation of rhetoricians to investigate science's discourse "The Rhetoric of Science" (Harris "Knowing" 164).
As rhetoric of science began to flourish, discussion began of a number of topics, including: Epistemic rhetoric and the discourses on the nature of semantics, knowledge, and truth: One example is the Robert L. Scott's work on viewing rhetoric as epistemic (1967). By the 1990s, epistemic rhetoric was a point of contention in the writing of Dilip Gaonkar (see "Critique" below). The early 1970s Speech Communication Conference ("Wingspread conference") gave recognition to the fact that rhetoric, in its globalization (multidisciplinary nature), has become a universal hermeneutic (Gross Rhetorical 2–5). Much scholastic output evolved concerning the theory of interpretation (hermeneutics), the knowledge-making and truth-seeking (epistemic) potential of rhetoric of science. Argument Fields (part of the Speech Communication Association and American forensic Association program): In this domain the work of Toulmin on argument appeals is exemplary. In addition, Michael Mulkay, Barry Barnes and David Bloor, as pioneers of the "Sociology of Scientific Knowledge" (SSK) movement, fostered a growing sociobiology debate. Others as Greg Myers expressed the benefits of a collaboration between rhetoricians and sociologists. Contributors to discussion pertaining to audience – the way arguments change as they move from the scientific community to the public – include John Lyne and Henry Howe. Scientific Giants: The important works that investigate the suasive powers of exemplars in science include those of Alan G. GrossGross, Alan G. (1990) The Rhetoric of Science, Harvard University Press (Newton, Descartes, argument fields in optics), John Angus CampbellJohn Angus Campbell (1989) The Invisible Rhetorician: Charles Darwin’s Third Party Strategy, The Rhetorician 7(1): 55–85, via University of Waterloo (Darwin), and Michael Halloran (Watson and Crick). J. C. Maxwell introduced differentiable vector fields E and B to express Michael Faraday's findings about an electric field E and a magnetic field B. Thomas K. Simpson has described his rhetorical methods, first with a guided study,Thomas K. Simpson (1997) Maxwell on the Electromagnetic Field: a guided study, Rutgers University Press then a literary appreciationT. K. Simpson (2005) Figures of Thought, a literary appreciation of Maxwell’s Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Green Lion Press of A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism (1873), and with a book attending to the mathematical rhetoric.T. K. Simpson (2010) Maxwell’s Mathematical Rhetoric: rethinking the Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Green Lion Press,
Other major themes in rhetoric of science include the investigation of the accomplishments and suasive abilities of individuals (ethos) who have become influential in their respective sciences as well as an age old concern of rhetoric of science – public science policy. Science policy involves deliberative issues, and the first rhetorical study of science policy was made in 1953 by Richard M. Weaver. Among others, Helen Longino's work on public policy implications of low-level radiation continues this tradition.Alan G. Gross (1996) "Rhetoric of Science", Encyclopedia of Rhetoric and Composition: Communication from Ancient Times to the Information Age. New York: Garland Publishing
The reconstitution of rhetorical theory around the lines of invention (inventio), argumentation and stylistic adaptation is occurring currently (Simons 6). The major question is whether training in rhetoric can in fact help scholars and investigators make intelligent choices between rival theories, methods or data collection, and incommensurate values (Simons 14).