[KB] Warrantable Outrage

Edappel8@cs.com Edappel8 at cs.com
Thu May 29 17:52:03 EDT 2008

>From Greg Desilet:

Yes, I did take you seriously, but only in the sense you suggest! --as using 
a provocative rhetorical device for raising the appropriateness of the Burkean 
comedic framing of conflict (or, in my terminology, the "tragic" framing, or 
even Lewis's suggested "romantic" framing) in situations as extreme as Pearl 
Harbor, 1941. I found it a "head scratching" question in putting it to those, 
like myself (who subscribe to some version of this "seeing two sides at once" 
vision regarding the structuring and response to conflict): Would you have said 
anything differently? 

Given the proposed romantic frame and Brockiede's "Arguers as Lovers" analogy 
I thought to rephrase your question in even more extreme terms: How or should 
one "romance" a rapist? In such situations, as you note, there are clearly 
limits to rhetorical appeal. I think the primary boundary that, according to 
advocates such as myself, should not be carelessly crossed concerns rhetoric of 
demonization (godless monsters, etc.) because it so readily induces loss of 
perspective to the point of inflaming sentiments of indiscriminate genocide as 
opposed to calculated response to perpetrators. To his credit, Roosevelt avoided 
such rhetoric in this speech, focusing on naming the DEEDS as "dastardly," 
"treachery," etc.

-------------- next part --------------
HTML attachment scrubbed and removed

More information about the KB mailing list