This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: cholars to accept the better argum ent and reject the wors e.
The ques tion is whether the s cholar -- who us ually fancies him s elf an announcer of â€˜res ults â€™ or a s tater
of â€˜conclus ions â€™, free of rhetoric -- s peaks rhetorically. Does he try to pers uade? It would s eem s s o.
Language, I jus t s aid, is not a s olitary accom plis hm ent. The s cholar does nâ€™t s peak into the void, or to
him s elf. He s peaks to a com m unity of voices . He des ires to be heeded, prais ed, publis hed, im itated, honored, en-Nobeled. Thes e are the des ires . The devices of language are the m eans .
Rhetoric is the proportioning of m eans to des ires in s peech. Rhetoric is an econom ics of language, the s tudy of
how s carce m eans are allocated to the ins atiable des ires of people to be heard. It s eem s on the face of it a
reas onable hypothes is that econom is ts are like other people in being talkers , who des ire lis teners . Why they go
to the library or the laboratory as m uch as when they go to the office on the polls . The purpos e here is to s ee if
this is true, and to s ee if it is us eful: to s tudy the rhetoric of econom ic s cholars hip.
The s ubject is s cholars hip. It is not the ec...
View Full Document
This document was uploaded on 03/23/2014.
- Summer '14