Berlin states, "For social-epistemic rhetoric, the real is located in a relationship that involves the dialectical interaction of the observer, the discourse community (social group) in which the observer is functioning, and the material conditions of existence" (488). The influences which create a piece of rhetoric or writing are innumerable, to say the least.
Circling back around to LeFevre's "Invention as a Social Act" it is easy to see some agreement between the authors. Yet, the end of Berlin's quote "and the material conditions of existence" brings individuality into mix. Our reality is based on our dialogues, conversations, and arguments that we participate in within a social group that we interact with. Okay, that makes sense, and then there are the material conditions of existence. I think this means the conditions of the individual -- which help to shape our minds --also play a part in in the social-epistemic rhetoric. Anyway, the "social" arenas that make up most of our ability to view the world may be right in front of us, such as school or the workplace, but we are also being influenced by past social arenas. Whether these are prior schools, families, or institutions is probably irrelevant. What is relevant is what these prior situations left us with. My existence, to within the last few years, has been volatile and has lacked structure. So, it appears, that that existence "flavors" most everything I read, discuss, and think about.
So, if this is the case, then isn't social invention, social epistemology, or anything else with social in the name, made independently unique by the stamps made on the mind of the individual? While everything remains social, it is indelibly stamped with the individual. Or maybe not.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
It sounds almost like you're starting to talk about a person's "frame of reference" which is shaped by a person's beliefs, values, experiences, etc. It's our own frame of reference through which we interpret the world around us, and it's others' frame of reference to which we must appeal when we craft messages that have a distinct goal.
When Berlin discusses the "material" third of the social-epistemic triad, I began to consider how this may fit in with A-N-T theorists "turn' toward actual material (non-human) forms in assembling the social (I.e. ". .. one of them is the special role granted to non-humans" etc. on Latour, pg. 10).
Post a Comment