Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Lyssnandeaspekter på retoriken i den offentliga debatten
Södertörn University, School of Culture and Education.
2013 (Swedish)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

The purpose of this study has been to investigate the extent of listening in a debate in the Swedish media. If the debaters listen to each other in a complex issue such as religion's place in society and if a debater who has a high degree of listening initially already in problem definition phase, has more possible solutions than the one that has a lower level of listening. The results show that there is a listening in all the articles, but the articles that have a broader definition of the problem also have a broader problem solving, than the articles that have a more narrow definition of the problem.

The articles with a broader definition of the problem and a broader problem solving, have a predominantly agonistic debate strategy. Even if the debate rhetoric is primarily designed to win over the opponents, there is partly a genuine listening and an interest in finding new possible solutions. But despite that the opponents’ arguments are mainly used to present the authors own arguments, the authors’ intentions seems to be predominantly honest. There is more than rheterology than rhetrickery in these articles.

The articles with a more narrow definition of the problem, also has a narrower problem solving and a more antagonistic debate strategy. The rhetoric here also aims to win over the opponents. But although there is some listening even in these articles, the listening is not about bringing the issue under debate towards a new possible solution. I perceive this listening as more manipulative. There are more rhetrickery than rheterology in these articles.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2013. , 55 p.
National Category
Humanities
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-19663OAI: oai:DiVA.org:sh-19663DiVA: diva2:646026
Subject / course
Rhetoric
Uppsok
Humanities, Theology
Supervisors
Available from: 2013-09-06 Created: 2013-09-06 Last updated: 2013-09-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(630 kB)160 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 630 kBChecksum SHA-512
818ebd4be9183a7eb09f0d04116b62b1ff322489a7ada03c102709009d1797a7a106043b96d5820784627ca66cb36d43be35f1de0e277ab892476c97090fffc5
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
School of Culture and Education
Humanities

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 160 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 137 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf