Starting from a well-known scene of Plato's Gorgias, where the sophist claims the need for the do... more Starting from a well-known scene of Plato's Gorgias, where the sophist claims the need for the doctor to resort to his art, that is rhetoric, the paper tries to reconstruct the relationship between rhetoric, argumentation and medicine in the preplatonic age. Unlike the image provided in Plato's Gorgias scene, this relationship is much more complex. It focuses on two main aspects: 1) how to acquire knowledge of what escapes direct observation; 2) how soul and body interact in human action.
Area 11 -Scienze storiche, filosofiche, pedagogiche e psicologiche Tweet SINTESI Sebbene sia stat... more Area 11 -Scienze storiche, filosofiche, pedagogiche e psicologiche Tweet SINTESI Sebbene sia stato abitualmente considerato uno dei testi fondatori della tradizione retorica, l'Encomio di Elena di Gorgia non aveva finora ricevuto un'interpretazione che ne evidenziasse il singolare intreccio di retorica e politica. Questo libro propone di ravvisare nel testo gorgiano la formulazione di una "filosofia politica del linguaggio" e di un modello di "cittadinanza retorica" su cui può essere ancora utile riflettere. Gorgia diventa così un pensatore in grado di dialogare con alcuni dei principali teorici moderni della democrazia, mostrando, da un lato, l'inestricabile intreccio che lega, oggi più che mai, retorica, argomentazione e democrazia, dall'altro, il ruolo, spesso rimosso, del conflitto e della violenza nella nostrapratica discorsiva. pagine: 284 formato: 12 x 17
Gli obiettivi polemici di Gorgia nel Trattato sul non ente Martedì 23 maggio 2017, ore 15.30 Go... more Gli obiettivi polemici di Gorgia nel Trattato sul non ente Martedì 23 maggio 2017, ore 15.30 Gorgia e i contemporanei A partire dal libro di Mauro Serra (Retorica, argomentazione, democrazia. Per una filosofia politica del linguaggio, Aracne 2017) Presiede
There was recently an attempt to correlate some sectors of the studies on argumentation and the t... more There was recently an attempt to correlate some sectors of the studies on argumentation and the theory of democracy. The relationship between these two areas concerns the fact that in both cases there is a ignificant interest in normative models of good argumentation. In these models there is no place for rhetoric. Our work has a twofold aim: (1) to show that,starting from the Aristotelian rhetoric, it is possible to develop a more suitable model of argumentation in the public sphere and (2) to doubt the very need to identify normative constraints for this type of argument.
The role of passions in politics is paradoxical. They are traditionally considered a threat, but ... more The role of passions in politics is paradoxical. They are traditionally considered a threat, but at the same time, also as a result of research in neuroscience, we recognize more and more that we can't do without them. Hence a stalemate well represented by the relationship between the two main conceptions of democracy, agonistic democracy and deliberative democracy. The former appeals to the passions but without being able to explain how to urge them without being a victim of them, the latter describes a reason free from passions, but has the problem of engaging citizens and can be susceptible to the charge of motivational impotence. Faced with this situation, rhetoric seems to be a discipline that can provide a theoretical framework to connect fruitfully reason and passions in political sphere. This framework has three distinctive features: the role of doxa (belief) as link between reason and passions, an agonistic conception of truth, a tragic view of world based on a deep awareness of the limits of human reason and the belief that rhetorical action is the means by which identities become temporarily enacted and forged in response to the needs of a specific contingent situation.
The aim of this paper is to show that the attempt pursued by many
scholars, within both Argumenta... more The aim of this paper is to show that the attempt pursued by many scholars, within both Argumentation Theory and political philosophy, to distinguish a good rhetoric from a bad one is, at least in the case of deliberative argumentation, unsatisfactory.
In Italy there is no real dialogue between rhetoric and philosophy of language. Rhetoric is a dis... more In Italy there is no real dialogue between rhetoric and philosophy of language. Rhetoric is a discipline practiced almost only by philologists and literary scholars. One important reason for this lack of dialogue, I argue, is that in Italy there has not been a reconsideration of sophists' rhetorical theory. Two main consequences can be derived from that reconsideration: 1) rhetoric was in its origins a philosophy of language, which didn't consider language autonomously but in close relationship with what is out of language; 2) rhetoric did focus on the agonistic dimension of linguistic practice and therefore did think about the complex relationship between language and violence (power). I take the field of argumentation theory as a good example of what it means to give up to a rhetorical point of view about language.
The aim of this paper is to show the difference between narration and argumentation in ancient Gr... more The aim of this paper is to show the difference between narration and argumentation in ancient Greek culture from the point of view of their respective conception of truth. I make reference to Homeric poems and to Gorgias' Encomium of Helen as examples respectively of narrative and argumentative texts. Both Homer and Gorgias use the word kosmos to make clear their notion of truth. But while in Homer the truth of narration is the result of factual accuracy, by the same word kosmos Gorgias points to the strong connection between truth and logical consistency. mauro serra testi e linguaggi 6/2012
Over the past thirty years, the theoretical reflection on the functioning of democracy has underg... more Over the past thirty years, the theoretical reflection on the functioning of democracy has undergone a remarkable development. It has been polarized around two different theoretical paradigms, that of deliberative democracy and that of agonistic democracy. The first emphasizes the role of rational deliberation as a means to generate a consensus legitimate and binding on the parties involved. The second considers, however, conflict and dissent as unavoidable conditions of democratic life and its proper functioning. Despite their obvious differences, both models are linked by a substantial misunderstanding of the role of rhetoric. The aim of this paper is to show that a correct interpretation of the rhetorical dimension, however, provides two theoretical advantages: 1) finding a point of articulation and convergence between the two different models; 2) focusing on an issue of great importance (neglected in both cases): the fundamental inequality of the subjects in the access to the conditions of communicative interaction. __________________________________________________________________________________ 83 fondamentale disuguaglianza dei soggetti nell'accesso alle condizioni dell'interazione comunicativa. Il testo è organizzato nella maniera seguente. Nei primi due paragrafi fornisco una descrizione, necessariamente sintetica, dei presupposti teorici di entrambi i modelli, concentrandomi sulle proposte di Jürgen Habermas e Chantal Mouffe. Nel terzo analizzo il ruolo attribuito al loro interno alla retorica, cercando di mostrare che esso presuppone un'idea fuorviante di retorica. Nel quarto propongo di fondare la nozione di conflitto su basi antropologiche e naturalistiche. Nel quinto, infine, utilizzo uno dei testi fondanti dell'antica tradizione retorica, l'Encomio di Elena di Gorgia, per esemplificare quel modello agonistico della deliberazione di cui, a mio avviso, necessita oggi la teoria democratica.
Rivista Italiana di Filosofia del Linguaggio, Dec 30, 2012
The aim of this paper is to show, through the example of Gorgias' Encomium of Helen, the fruitful... more The aim of this paper is to show, through the example of Gorgias' Encomium of Helen, the fruitful role of disagreement in argumentative theory and practice. Gorgias' Encomium contains a seeming contradiction, that has puzzled the scholars. While in the opening section of the text, Gorgias outlines the strong connection between truth and logos, about one third of the same text is devoted to showing that the wonderful power of logos depends not on its truth, but on its skillful use. So logos is akin to brute force that moves the listener in an almost physical way. Yet the seeming contradiction disappears, when we understand that logos is for Gorgias a competitive and agonistic practice, in which one logos can always be confuted by another (logically stronger) one. From this point of view truth and opinion are two interchangeable conditions and even Gorgias' logos about Helen will be truthful only until it is, if possible, confuted by another one. In the final section of the paper I show that this model of language functioning can have some political consequences: argumentation as a logically competitive practice plays a leading role in developing democratic citizenship.
Starting from a well-known scene of Plato's Gorgias, where the sophist claims the need for the do... more Starting from a well-known scene of Plato's Gorgias, where the sophist claims the need for the doctor to resort to his art, that is rhetoric, the paper tries to reconstruct the relationship between rhetoric, argumentation and medicine in the preplatonic age. Unlike the image provided in Plato's Gorgias scene, this relationship is much more complex. It focuses on two main aspects: 1) how to acquire knowledge of what escapes direct observation; 2) how soul and body interact in human action.
Area 11 -Scienze storiche, filosofiche, pedagogiche e psicologiche Tweet SINTESI Sebbene sia stat... more Area 11 -Scienze storiche, filosofiche, pedagogiche e psicologiche Tweet SINTESI Sebbene sia stato abitualmente considerato uno dei testi fondatori della tradizione retorica, l'Encomio di Elena di Gorgia non aveva finora ricevuto un'interpretazione che ne evidenziasse il singolare intreccio di retorica e politica. Questo libro propone di ravvisare nel testo gorgiano la formulazione di una "filosofia politica del linguaggio" e di un modello di "cittadinanza retorica" su cui può essere ancora utile riflettere. Gorgia diventa così un pensatore in grado di dialogare con alcuni dei principali teorici moderni della democrazia, mostrando, da un lato, l'inestricabile intreccio che lega, oggi più che mai, retorica, argomentazione e democrazia, dall'altro, il ruolo, spesso rimosso, del conflitto e della violenza nella nostrapratica discorsiva. pagine: 284 formato: 12 x 17
Gli obiettivi polemici di Gorgia nel Trattato sul non ente Martedì 23 maggio 2017, ore 15.30 Go... more Gli obiettivi polemici di Gorgia nel Trattato sul non ente Martedì 23 maggio 2017, ore 15.30 Gorgia e i contemporanei A partire dal libro di Mauro Serra (Retorica, argomentazione, democrazia. Per una filosofia politica del linguaggio, Aracne 2017) Presiede
There was recently an attempt to correlate some sectors of the studies on argumentation and the t... more There was recently an attempt to correlate some sectors of the studies on argumentation and the theory of democracy. The relationship between these two areas concerns the fact that in both cases there is a ignificant interest in normative models of good argumentation. In these models there is no place for rhetoric. Our work has a twofold aim: (1) to show that,starting from the Aristotelian rhetoric, it is possible to develop a more suitable model of argumentation in the public sphere and (2) to doubt the very need to identify normative constraints for this type of argument.
The role of passions in politics is paradoxical. They are traditionally considered a threat, but ... more The role of passions in politics is paradoxical. They are traditionally considered a threat, but at the same time, also as a result of research in neuroscience, we recognize more and more that we can't do without them. Hence a stalemate well represented by the relationship between the two main conceptions of democracy, agonistic democracy and deliberative democracy. The former appeals to the passions but without being able to explain how to urge them without being a victim of them, the latter describes a reason free from passions, but has the problem of engaging citizens and can be susceptible to the charge of motivational impotence. Faced with this situation, rhetoric seems to be a discipline that can provide a theoretical framework to connect fruitfully reason and passions in political sphere. This framework has three distinctive features: the role of doxa (belief) as link between reason and passions, an agonistic conception of truth, a tragic view of world based on a deep awareness of the limits of human reason and the belief that rhetorical action is the means by which identities become temporarily enacted and forged in response to the needs of a specific contingent situation.
The aim of this paper is to show that the attempt pursued by many
scholars, within both Argumenta... more The aim of this paper is to show that the attempt pursued by many scholars, within both Argumentation Theory and political philosophy, to distinguish a good rhetoric from a bad one is, at least in the case of deliberative argumentation, unsatisfactory.
In Italy there is no real dialogue between rhetoric and philosophy of language. Rhetoric is a dis... more In Italy there is no real dialogue between rhetoric and philosophy of language. Rhetoric is a discipline practiced almost only by philologists and literary scholars. One important reason for this lack of dialogue, I argue, is that in Italy there has not been a reconsideration of sophists' rhetorical theory. Two main consequences can be derived from that reconsideration: 1) rhetoric was in its origins a philosophy of language, which didn't consider language autonomously but in close relationship with what is out of language; 2) rhetoric did focus on the agonistic dimension of linguistic practice and therefore did think about the complex relationship between language and violence (power). I take the field of argumentation theory as a good example of what it means to give up to a rhetorical point of view about language.
The aim of this paper is to show the difference between narration and argumentation in ancient Gr... more The aim of this paper is to show the difference between narration and argumentation in ancient Greek culture from the point of view of their respective conception of truth. I make reference to Homeric poems and to Gorgias' Encomium of Helen as examples respectively of narrative and argumentative texts. Both Homer and Gorgias use the word kosmos to make clear their notion of truth. But while in Homer the truth of narration is the result of factual accuracy, by the same word kosmos Gorgias points to the strong connection between truth and logical consistency. mauro serra testi e linguaggi 6/2012
Over the past thirty years, the theoretical reflection on the functioning of democracy has underg... more Over the past thirty years, the theoretical reflection on the functioning of democracy has undergone a remarkable development. It has been polarized around two different theoretical paradigms, that of deliberative democracy and that of agonistic democracy. The first emphasizes the role of rational deliberation as a means to generate a consensus legitimate and binding on the parties involved. The second considers, however, conflict and dissent as unavoidable conditions of democratic life and its proper functioning. Despite their obvious differences, both models are linked by a substantial misunderstanding of the role of rhetoric. The aim of this paper is to show that a correct interpretation of the rhetorical dimension, however, provides two theoretical advantages: 1) finding a point of articulation and convergence between the two different models; 2) focusing on an issue of great importance (neglected in both cases): the fundamental inequality of the subjects in the access to the conditions of communicative interaction. __________________________________________________________________________________ 83 fondamentale disuguaglianza dei soggetti nell'accesso alle condizioni dell'interazione comunicativa. Il testo è organizzato nella maniera seguente. Nei primi due paragrafi fornisco una descrizione, necessariamente sintetica, dei presupposti teorici di entrambi i modelli, concentrandomi sulle proposte di Jürgen Habermas e Chantal Mouffe. Nel terzo analizzo il ruolo attribuito al loro interno alla retorica, cercando di mostrare che esso presuppone un'idea fuorviante di retorica. Nel quarto propongo di fondare la nozione di conflitto su basi antropologiche e naturalistiche. Nel quinto, infine, utilizzo uno dei testi fondanti dell'antica tradizione retorica, l'Encomio di Elena di Gorgia, per esemplificare quel modello agonistico della deliberazione di cui, a mio avviso, necessita oggi la teoria democratica.
Rivista Italiana di Filosofia del Linguaggio, Dec 30, 2012
The aim of this paper is to show, through the example of Gorgias' Encomium of Helen, the fruitful... more The aim of this paper is to show, through the example of Gorgias' Encomium of Helen, the fruitful role of disagreement in argumentative theory and practice. Gorgias' Encomium contains a seeming contradiction, that has puzzled the scholars. While in the opening section of the text, Gorgias outlines the strong connection between truth and logos, about one third of the same text is devoted to showing that the wonderful power of logos depends not on its truth, but on its skillful use. So logos is akin to brute force that moves the listener in an almost physical way. Yet the seeming contradiction disappears, when we understand that logos is for Gorgias a competitive and agonistic practice, in which one logos can always be confuted by another (logically stronger) one. From this point of view truth and opinion are two interchangeable conditions and even Gorgias' logos about Helen will be truthful only until it is, if possible, confuted by another one. In the final section of the paper I show that this model of language functioning can have some political consequences: argumentation as a logically competitive practice plays a leading role in developing democratic citizenship.
Uploads
Papers by mauro serra
a more suitable model of argumentation in the public sphere and (2) to doubt the very need to identify normative constraints for this type of argument.
scholars, within both Argumentation Theory and political philosophy, to distinguish a good rhetoric from a bad one is, at least in the case of deliberative argumentation, unsatisfactory.
Archive by mauro serra
Books by mauro serra
a more suitable model of argumentation in the public sphere and (2) to doubt the very need to identify normative constraints for this type of argument.
scholars, within both Argumentation Theory and political philosophy, to distinguish a good rhetoric from a bad one is, at least in the case of deliberative argumentation, unsatisfactory.