Burke and Dewey

It is interesting that Burke was inspired by Dewey in his educational philosophy in his attention to progressive education as they were both considered progressive but in such different ways(Enoch 277). His jump to theoritizing on ways that "...education could promote peace and mitigate war," mark him as a man of his times in a post World War II time, encouraging criticl reflection, rather than argumentation(Enoch 279). Burke would encourage "...distrustful admiration of all symbolism, and ... questioning "...the many symbolically-stimulated goads that are now accepted to often without question" (286). He seems to asking students to observe, distance themselves and respond to text and real life situations with great care. While this would seem to imply an inability to act Enoch says instead that "Reflection is a way to act on and approach the world" (291)). The attitude of "patience and withdrawal"that he advocates seems contradictory, yet wise.

I prefer Fulwiler's approach to education because Burke's wisdom only goes so far. It just seems like a first step. Fulwiler says "Expressive writing and speaking continue[s] to make passive classrooms active" (handout on Toby Fulwiler with excerpts From Writing Across the Michigan Tech Curriculum, 1). In a related sense, Palmquist, Kiefer, Hartvigsen and Goodlew found that students in a computer classroom had more action going on than a traditional classroom, with "a higher level of interaction with students"... and these interactions were "initiated by students and focused directly on their writing" (258). This shows that a value is placed in pedagogy on active participation of students physically and socially. I like John Dewey's focus on education having "psychological insight into the child's capacities, interest, and habits, as a "process of living" but find that like Burke's reflection, it is a limited philosophy in terms of action to prevent wars, as was his ideal (handout on John Dewey with excerpts from My Pedagogic Creed [1896},1). Dialogue such as United Nations events, Presidential Summits and media debates on policy seem to shape opinions moreso. Berlin points out that "The business of cognitive psychology is to enable us to learn to think in a way that will realize goals, not deliberate about their value" (672). This certainly suggests that the psychology of learning when cognitive might be able to be goal oriented, perhaps a goal of action to prevent wars, rather than deliberate on the rightness or wrongness of war. I believe that argumentation at some point, accompanied by and interspersed with reflection, will produce better results, as it more interactive and goal oriented than simply reflection on a position.

Berlin, James. "Rhetoric and Ideology in the Writing Class." Miller, Susan Ed. The Norton Book of Composition Studies. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2009. 667-684. Print.

Enoch, Jessica. "Becoming Symbol-Wise: Kenneth Burk's Pedagogy of Critical Reflection. College Composition and Communication, Vol. 56,No. 2 (Dec., 2004). 272-296. Reprinted by NCTE with JSTOR.

Palmquist, Mike, Kate Keifer, James Hartvigsen and Barbara Goodlew. "Contrasts: Teaching and Learning about Writing in Traditional and Computer Classrooms." Sidler, Michele, Richard Morris and Elizabeth Overland Smith, eds. Computers in the Composition Classroom: A Critical Sourcebook. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins,2008. 251-270. Print.

coleridge and the philosophical perspective

Today the center of audience in discourse is difficult to dispute, as the field of rhetoric embraces "what Lynn Worsham terms our field's modernist commitment 'to the Enlightenment dreams of communication and consensus, emancipation and empowerment"in Lunsford and Ede'a article in the Miller text (820). This suggests the importance of expressing our goals, as well as how they are affected by the place of others, culture and institutions in creating communication to address and persuade an audience. As the writer moves to shape themselves within a rhetorical tradition, there is a call on our memories, identifications,experience and knowledge base, which Lunsford and Ede suggest, creates "a way of being in language and a way of both inhabiting and shaping knowledge structures, ways that strive to be critically self-reflective, multi-perspectival, and complex"(821). The authors in this second description of how writer's shape themselves, seem to be calling on Coleridge's philosophy derived from Plato, which Veeder describes as follows: "the purpose of the dialectic (and its social counterpart, dialogue) was to reconcile opposing views and to inform the composer rather than convince others of a preconceived truth" (24). The role of audience was not the issue-- it was convincing oneself as a writer of the rightness of their position that was important for Coleridge. [Coleridege apparently] "agreed with Plato's claim that the purpose of argumentation was to help the composer to be 'throughly convinced that things were so"and "was the required 'philosophical attitude' necessary for sound composition"(24).

However,the exploration of opposing viewpoints and multiple perspectives,in the development of our own compositional philosophy can contribute to a modern day writer who is more open to contradictions in shaping a philosophy embracing community and future unknowns. The audience might not only be in our thoughts to communicate with and persuade but to reflect in conjunction with that audience. When we engage in collaboration, "human conversation takes place within us as well as among us, and that conversation as it takes place within us is what we call reflective thought" according to Bruffee (548-549). He seems to be saying that our internal thought process and social learned information play equal roles in the development of learning and certainty of knowledge. In fact, he suggested that "The most sophisticated scientific knowledge is established and maintained" through a collaborative learning process, joining "'the conversation of mankind'"(555).

Today we have more access to global ideas through technology, as we reach out to our classmates worldwide. Through file sharing and other methods of sharing information, such as You Tube, the audience can participate not only in pre-writing idea sharing, but in revision and turning "writer based prose into reader based prose" in a 'public forum' (Eldred,246-247). So while Coleridge's ideas are intriguing, they seem to describing only a partial view of how the writer can go about developing their philosophy, more accurate in an pre-technology age.

Bruffee, Kenneth A. "Collaborative Learning and the 'Conversations of Mankind'". Miller, Susan, Ed. The Norton Book of Composition Studies. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2009. Print. 545-562.

Eldred, Janet M. "Pedagogy in the Computer-networked Classroom. Sidler, Michelle, Richard Morris and Elizabeth Overman Smith. Computers in the Composition Classroom: A Critical Sourcebook. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2008. Print. 239-250.

Lunsford, Andrea A. and Lisa Ede. "Representing Audience: 'Successful' Discourse and Disciplinary Critique". Miller, Susan Ed. The Norton Book of Compositional Studies. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2009. Print. 813-823.

Veeder, Rex. "Coleridge's Philosophy of Composition: An Overview of a Romantic Rhetorician. [Class Handout] Print. 20-28.

Hugh Blair & charles Bazerman

Can Hugh Blairs's work be applied to our current day studies in composition? While there was much discussion in the class and handout on Hugh Blair of his artificial system. Yet the article also state under Lecture XII as follows"A florid style implie excess of ornament..They forget that, unless founded on good sense and solid thought, the most florid style id but a childish imposition on the public" (2nd page of handout titled "Summary of lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres"). This would suggest that Hugh Blair valued what we now think of as critical thinking, reasoning and a well grounded argument. He also is cited in the same handout on page 1 under Lecture X Style-Perspicuity and Precision that "This (perpicuity) must be our first object, to make our meaning clearly and fully understood, and understood without the least difficulty". This would seem to indicate that Hugh Blair also valued simplicity, chronological, line ordered presentation with the argument written in language that is commonly known. Neither statement is stressing beauty or style, as much as a reliance on reason and simple language. Charles Bazerman's article suggests that in the writing of scientific texts the author is influential versus the rhetoric per see, as "they interpret and attempt to realize his [the scientist] ambitions in their writing"(509). This further suggests that the writers thoughts become central. The subject gives the scientist eminence, as their thought becomes the subject. Hugh Blair says"...it is to the intercourse and transmission of thought, by means of speech, that we are chiefly indebted for the improvement of thought itself" ()page one, Lecture I Introduction of Summary of Lectures on Rhetoric and Belle Lettres). Both articles are foscued on thought and reason, as the role of the author and audience are considered, in a argument based on logic.