Stasis Questions for Political Disagreements

1min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

Stasis Theory was developed by ancient rhetoricians to address political disagreements, which were seen as a threat to the state's survival. They believed that divided polis could not endure, likening political disagreements to a cancer in the state. Stasis Questions were created to identify the real divisions in political disagreements and ensure concerted efforts towards solutions. Cicero categorized disagreements into four types, emphasizing that a disagreement not fitting into these categories was merely a verbal dispute rather than a true disagreement.

Robin Reames breaks down the major techniques of rhetoric, pulling back the curtain on how politicians, journalists, and “journalists” convince us to believe what we believe—and to talk, vote, and act accordingly.

Understanding these techniques helps us avoid being manipulated by authority figures who don’t have our best interests at heart. It also grants us rare insight into the values that shape our own beliefs.

Reames and Shermer discuss: rhetoric vs. facts (rhetorical truths vs. empirical truths) • the point of reason (to understand reality or to persuade?) • Canons of rhetoric: invention, arrangement, style, memory, delivery • bullshitters vs. liars • induction and deduction • rhetorical, ideological, and metaphorical thinking • how to debate contentious issues

Robin Reames is associate professor of English at the University of Illinois at Chicago, specializing in rhetorical theory and the history of ideas. Her new book is The Ancient Art of Thinking for Yourself: The Power of Rhetoric in Polarized Times.

SPONSOR: everything-everywhere.com