查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 說服與判斷:古典修辭對當代民主的啟發
- A Preliminary Study of Rhetorical Democracy
- 「文化」語彙之運用與理解--以評說德國實務為中心
- 修辭與民主:亞里斯多德論政治修辭
- 論審議的多元溝通模式
- 民主社會的菁英統治:對密爾《論代議政府》的一個詮釋
- 公民會議與審議民主:全民健保的公民參與經驗
- A Study of Chinese Oral Interpretation Rhetorical Strategy as Applied to English Persuasive Speeches: An Exemplar of Interpreting U. S. President George W. Bush's State of the Union Address
- 網際民主與審議民主之實踐--資訊化社會的桃花源村?
- 審議民主與公民養成
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 說服與判斷:古典修辭對當代民主的啟發=Persuasion and Judgment: Modern Democracy from the Perspective of Classical Rhetoric |
---|---|
作者 | 胡全威; | 書刊名 | 政治科學論叢 |
卷期 | 55 2013.03[民102.03] |
頁次 | 頁1-32 |
分類號 | 571.6 |
關鍵詞 | 修辭; 說服; 民主; 判斷; 審議民主; Rhetoric; Democracy; Persuasion; Judgment; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 本文從古典修辭觀反省當代民主政治。首先指出修辭在古典民主中的重要性與必要性。其次指出當代民主因為主客觀環境的變化,使得當代民主在政治溝通上,與古典民主運用修辭、訴諸群眾的互動模式有類似之處,因此可以引為借鏡。本文主要論點認為,古典修辭觀在「說服」與「判斷」兩項特質上,可以與當代盛行的審議民主理論作比較參照。由於當代審議民主過於強調理性言說、證成、審議等特質,因而無法貼近解釋現實政治,形成實踐與理論上的差距。當視角轉換到古典修辭觀時,反而更能理解當代民主的面貌,進而提供規範性的修正意見。總的來說,本文認為基於當代民主政治的發展趨勢,政治人物言說越顯重要,理論上的漠視,並不會使煽動、蠱惑、顛倒是非的政治人物消失。理論或規範層面上,必須正視這個現象。而本文認為古典修辭觀對於政治人物言說,提供極佳的規範概念,也更貼近政治實踐,易於借鏡,值得成為民主政體中公民教育的重要內涵。 |
英文摘要 | This paper reflects on contemporary democracy from the perspective of classical rhetoric. I argue that persuasion and judgment, the two main elements of rhetoric, are better concepts for understanding and critiquing actual democratic processes than rational speech and justification in deliberative democratic theory. Rational speech and justification claims a higher degree of abstraction, making it impractical in the real world and producing a gap between theory and practice. On the other hand, rhetoric provides a more feasible normative approach to scrutinizing public speeches, and provided a more attractive model of proper persuasion. The process of ”persuasion” is distinctive from that of ”justification.” Persuasion assumes greater attention to the specific audience and use of easily understood language. I contend that it also implies a form of ”equality in speech” that is concerned with the specificity of the audience. In contrast, deliberative democrats presumes a universal and abstract audience, ignoring differences between audiences. This assumption of sameness sacrifices the power of persuasion. Furthermore, classical rhetoric emphasizes the importance of judgment; in particular, ”arguing on both sides” allows the audience to better understand the issues and make decisions that are more robust. In conclusion, the paper shows that ignorance of theory means that political demagogues disappear. Classical rhetoric provides a normative and practical guide to the realities of democracy, and should be made a part of civic education in a democratic regime. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。