Creativity
– a fifth dimension of ethos?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52610/rhs.v28i89.317Keywords:
Etos, Kreativitet, Autentisitet, senmodernitet, praksis, kulturAbstract
About two decades ago some rhetoricians started paying attention to authenticity as a fourth dimension of ethos, in addition to Aristotle’s three dimensions: phronesis, areté and eunoia. In this article, the existence of a fifth dimension is considered: creativity. Where would such a dimension come from and what would it have to say for rhetorical criticism and the production of rhetorical discourse? An argument suggested in the article is that creativity as a separate dimension of ethos would clarify interpretations of ethos in the context of late modernity. This argument resonates with ideas put forward by the German cultural sociologist Andreas Reckwitz about late modernity in the Western world as a “society of singularities” (2020a) based on the “invention of creativity” (2017). The article ends with the suggestion that the creativity dimension consists of five qualities where differences (or différance) are practiced creating creative character or novelty.
References
Aristoteles (2006). Retorikk. Oversatt av T. Eide. Vidarforlaget.
Bakewell, S. (2023). Humanly possible. Seven hundred years of humanist freethinking, enquiry and hope. Chatto & Windus.
Baumlin, J. S., & Scisco, P. L. (2018). Ethos and its constitutive role in organizational rhetoric. In The Handbook of Organizational Rhetoric and Communication (pp. 201–213). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119265771.ch14 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119265771.ch14
Blikstad-Balas, M. (2014). Vague concepts in the educational sciences: implications for researchers. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58(5), 528-239. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2013.773558
Brinch, I. (2023). Etos i skrift, sak og sjel - tanker om skriving som karakterskaping. Rhetorica Scandinavica vol. 27 nr. 87, 72-88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52610/rhs.v27i87.119 DOI: https://doi.org/10.52610/rhs.v27i87.119
Burke, K. (1969). A grammar of motives. University of California Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520341715
Cherry, R. D. (1998). Ethos versus persona. Self-representation in written discourse. Written Communication Vol 5, nr. 3, 251-276. https://doi-org.ezproxy2.usn.no/10.1177/0741088388005003001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088388005003001
Derrida, J. (2006) Différance. I J. Derrida. Dekonstruksjon. Klassiske tekster i utvalg. Oversatt. Innledning av K. Gundersen. Spartacus
Eden, K. (2012). The renaissance rediscovery of intimacy. University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226184647.001.0001
Foucault, M. (2002a). Forelesninger om regjering og styringskunst. Forord ved Iver B. Neumann. Cappelen akademisk.
Foucault, M. (2002b/1972). Archaeology of knowledge. Oversatt av A.M. Sheridan Smith. Routledge.
Glăveanu, V. P (2023). Difference. I Glăveanu, V. P., Tanggaard, L., & Wegener, C. (red.) Creativity – a new vocabulary (2. utg.), s. 61- 69. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41907-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41907-2
Glăveanu, V. P. (2021). Creativity. A very short introduction. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780198842996.001.0001
Johansen, A. (2002). Talerens troverdighet: Tekniske og kulturelle betingelser for politisk retorikk. Universitetsforlaget.
Kneupper, C. W. (1985). The relation of agency to act in dramatism: A comment on “Burke’s act.” College English, 47(3), 305–308. https://doi.org/10.2307/376784 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/376784
Newman, G. E. (2019). The psychology of authenticity. Review of General Psychology, 23(1), 8–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000158 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000158
Newman, G. E., & Smith, R. K. (2016). Kinds of authenticity. Philosophy Compass, 11(10), 609–618. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12343 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12343
McCroskey, J. C. (2016). An introduction to rhetorical communication: A western cultural perspective. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315663791
Perinbanayagam, R. (2016). The rhetoric of emotions: A dramatistic exploration. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315134598 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315134598
Reckwitz, A. (2021). The end of illusions: Politics, economy, and culture in late modernity. Wiley.
Reckwitz, A. (2020a). Society of singularities. Polit.
Reckwitz, A. (2020b). Kreativitetens opfindelse: om den samfundsmæssige æstetieringsproces. Oversatt av Tom Havemann. Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Reckwitz, A. (2019). Singulariteternes samfund: om modernitetens strukturændringer. Oversatt av Tom Havemann. Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Reckwitz, A. (2017). The invention of creativity: Modern society and the culture of the new. Polity.
Ricoeur, P. (2004). Memory, history, forgetting. The University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226713465.001.0001
Rosengren, M. (2008). Doxologi: en essä om kunskap. Retorikforlaget. https://doi.org/10.52610/CWIZ1468 DOI: https://doi.org/10.52610/CWIZ1468
Sattler, W. M. (1947). Conceptions of ethos in ancient rhetoric. Speech Monographs Vol.14 (1-2), 55-65. https://doi-org.ezproxy2.usn.no/10.1080/03637754709374925 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03637754709374925
Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the self: The making of the modern identity. University Press.
Taylor, C. (1998). Autentisitetens etikk: Vol. bok nr 33. Cappelen akademisk forlag. https://urn.nb.no/URN:NBN:no-nb_digibok_2009041404071
Vannini, P., & Williams, J. P. (2016). Authenticity in culture, self, and society. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315261973
Vatz, R. E. (1973). The myth of the rhetorical situation. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 3, 154–161.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Rhetorica Scandinavica
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Open Access; CC Erkännande-IckeKommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0
