Queerly evangelical: the rhetoric of inverted belonging as a challenge to heteronormativity in evangelical theology

ABSTRACT

As a small but growing number of evangelical congregations, organizations, and individuals have adopted certain pro-LGBTQ beliefs in recent years, an intriguing rhetorical strategy has emerged: these evangelicals are claiming in various ways that their newfound beliefs, far from being an impediment to their evangelical identity, actually render them more faithful evangelicals than their anti-LGBTQ counterparts. Through what I call a rhetoric of inverted belonging, those who have long been regarded as irrevocable outsiders of evangelicalism are portraying themselves as more rightful insiders than those who exteriorize them from their religious tradition. In this paper, I illustrate the rhetoric of inverted belonging through a variety of examples from the theological discourse of pro-LGBTQ evangelical individuals and institutions. Analyzing this discourse through the lens of a prevalent definition of an evangelical, I demonstrate how the rhetoric of inverted belonging poses a unique challenge to heteronormative theologies within evangelicalism today.     

Everyday rhetoric: Argument and persuasion in everyday life

While the study of rhetoric in the humanities has an impressive pedigree, rhetorical analysis in organization studies is rather less developed. In this article, I want to provide an introduction to rhetorical analysis, drawing particularly on the work of Billig (1996) and Potter (1996), and illustrate its application to organizational issues through a case example concerning technological change in a public sector organization. In doing this, I demonstrate how alternative approaches to traditional positivism may augment the explanatory power of research in work and organizational psychology. In particular, I want to argue that an awareness of the everyday rhetoric of organizational talk can be illuminating in explaining how the work of an organization is accomplished.     

Logic or rhetoric in law?

One of the most crucial questions in the philosophy of law deals with the very nature of legal reasoning. Does this reasoning belong to logic or to rhetoric? This debate, increasingly centered on rhetoric, is not merely a question of language use; it covers and indicates a more basic choice between formal legalism — focusing on rational deduction from the law — and pragmatic judiciarism — focusing on reasonable debate in the court. Today, it is necessary to circumscribe the respective fields of logic and rhetoric in the language of law, while showing how they are sometimes complementary in the resolution of legal problems. But, even when we have acknowledged the need for a rhetoric accompanied by logic, we have to define that rhetoric cautiously. I confront a narrow rhetoric, often called argumentation, with a wider one of interrogative nature. There are two conceptions of rationality at stake. Their comparison enables us to raise the question of the foundation of law, as a locus to use arguments, as well as to solve social problems.     

The First Sophists and Feminism: Discourses of the “Other”

In this essay, I explore the parallel between the historical exclusions of rhetoric from philosophy and of women from fields of rational discourse. After considering the usefulness and limitations of deconstruction for exposing marginalization by hierax' chical systems, 1 explore links between texts of the sophists and feminist proposals for rewriting/rereading history by Cixous, Spivak, and others. I conclude that sophistic rhetoric offers a flexible alternative to philosophy as an intellectual framework for mediating theoretical oppositions among contemporary feminisms.     

Further Notes on Feminist Ethics and Pluralism: A Reply to Lindgren

In a comment on my paper, “Moral Understandings: Alternative Epistemology for a Feminist Ethics” (1989) Ralph Lindgren questions the wisdom of confronta' tional rhetoric in my paper and much feminist moral philosophy, and the consistency of this stance with pluralism about ethics. I defend both the rebellious rhetoric and the inclusivity of my own approach, but suggest that pluralism in moral philosophy is harder to define than Lindgren's comments suggest.     

The Rhetoric of Homosexual Practice

Many Protestant denominations have or recently had policies that prohibit “self‐avowed practicing homosexuals” from being ordained. By only prohibiting “practicing” homosexuals, proponents of these policies claim that they do not discriminate against homosexuals as a group since, technically, a homosexual can still be ordained as long as she is “non‐practicing.” In other words, a condemnation of homosexual practice is not the same as a condemnation of homosexual persons. I argue that this is not the case; the rhetoric of homosexual practice does, in fact, amount to a condemnation of gays and lesbians. It does so by conflating the two things it claims to keep separate—homosexual conduct and homosexual identity. I demonstrate this conflation by analyzing the history of this rhetoric and how it has been adjudicated in church court decisions from the United Methodist Church and the Presbyterian Church (USA).     

NATURAL RHETORIC AND THE PRAXIS OF UNDERSTANDING

Although rhetoric might be thought of as nothing more than an archaic art of manipulation, its ability to bring about action—particularly as the intellect and will engage in acts of persuasion amid the operations of the practical intellect—is a possibility that has gone largely unnoticed among philosophers of human nature. In this paper I explore the possibility that natural rhetoric, much as it serves the practical intellect in precipitating action, serves the speculative intellect as it stimulates acts of cognizing and understanding, thus leading to the acquisition of knowledge.     

The sense of smell: Morality and rhetoric in the Bramhall-Hobbes controversy

Olfactoric imagery is abundantly employed in the Bramhall-Hobbes controversy. I survey some examples and then turn to the possible significance of this. I argue that by forcing Hobbes into the figurative exchange Bramhall scores points in terms of moving the controversy into ground that is not covered by the limited view of rationality that Hobbes is committed to according to his rhetoric (at least as Bramhall perceives it). Bramhall clearly wants to move from cool argument to a more affluent rhetorical appeal. I argue that choosing such a richer epistemology coheres with Bramhall’s deeper anxieties regarding the moral method used in the Leviathan. This essay thus deviates from other form-content analysis of Hobbes, in attempting to examine his rhetoric in practice, under the pressure of controversy. My more general concern is in relating seemingly formal polemical choices to moral concerns. A previous version of this paper was read before a meeting of a German-Israeli controversy research group (headed by M. Dascal and G. Fritz) dedicated to the study of early modern controversies (Giessen, 2000). I am indebted to participants of that meeting for excellent comments and suggestion. I would also like to acknowledge the way by which Dascal’s pioneering work on the philosophical and historical importance of studying controversies has inspired this particular essay.     

The judicial dialogue

A variety of theoretical positions are emerging to explain the judicial process from such perspectives as hermeneutics, semiotics, critical theory and argumentation/rhetoric. They ask such questions as these: What is the source of judicial authority? How do judges arrive at their decisions? By what logic are decisions to be tested? In this essay I argue that a focus on decisions and their justifications alone masks the broader process in which judges, along with all the other relevant groups, engage in a continuing and evolving dialogue to structure their normative universe through the complementary processes of dialectic and rhetoric. Contemporary concepts of argumentation can serve to analyze this process critically.     

Transnational Quarantine Rhetorics: Public Mobilization in SARS and in H1N1 Flu

This essay examines how Chinese governments, local communities, and overseas Chinese in North America responded to the perceived health risks of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and H1N1 flu through the use of public and participatory rhetoric about risk and quarantines. Focusing on modes of security and quarantine practices, I examine how globalization and the social crises surrounding SARS and H1N1 flu operated to regulate differently certain bodies and areas. I identify three types of quarantines (mandatory, voluntary, and coerced) and conduct a transnational comparative analysis to investigate the relationships among quarantines, rhetoric, and public communication. I argue that health authorities must openly acknowledge the legitimacy of public input and actively seek public support regarding health crises. Only by collaborating with concerned communities and citizens and by providing careful guidance for public participation can health institutions ensure the efficacy of quarantine orders during emerging epidemics.     

Moral Reflection: Beyond Impartial Reason

This paper considers two accounts of the self that have gained prominence in contemporary feminist psychoanalytic theory and draws out the implications of these views with respect to the problem of moral reflection. I argue that our account of moral reflection will be impoverished unless it mobilizes the capacity to empathize with others and the rhetoric of figurative language. To make my case for this claim, I argue that John Rawls's account of reflective equilibrium suffers from his exclusive reliance on impartial reason.     

Linguistic Privilege and Justice: What Can We Learn from STEM?

Abstract

The linguistic privilege of native speakers in scientific communication, both oral and written, has been widely reported to influence researchers’ publications and careers in and beyond academia. I examine social structure and communication in the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) fields through the example of big science and attempt to answer the question of why language injustice has a less significant effect on non-native scientists and engineers than on philosophy scholars. I do so by scrutinizing the role of signs and nonlinguistic boundary objects in STEM practice and written communication. I also argue that although high-energy physics is relatively linguistically inclusive, it is marked by linguistic privilege of certain groups that bears a structural character which is not common in STEM and is predominant mainly in megascience. I finally suggest that insofar as rhetoric in STEM is generally modest, its practices can serve as an example for analytic philosophy, which also aims at minimizing rhetoric.     

‘New Rules for Labour Immigration’: Delving into the 2008 Swedish Reform of Labour Migration and Its Effects on Migrants’ Well-Being

I have investigated the nature of the transformation triggered by the reform of labour mobility entitled ‘New Rules for Labour Immigration’, introduced in Sweden in 2008, and its impact on migrants’ well-being. By applying the methodology of the ‘What’s the problem represented to be?’ approach (Bacchi 2009), I show that the problem at which the reform was aimed is represented as a shortage of skills and labour. I argue that such a representation and the silences it invokes are underpinned by the paradigms of managed migration and of neoliberalism, thus marking a discontinuity in the political rhetoric of universalism which had been endorsed by Sweden since the beginning of the 1970s. I contend that such a formulation of the problem assumes and entails a conceptualisation of migrants as factors of production. This formulation stands in sharp opposition to the one advanced by the Human Development and Capability Approach to migration (UNDP 2009) which recognises migrants as human beings, endowed with capabilities, aspirations, and agency. Such reification of migrants implies that the reform regulates the stay of immigrants in Sweden with the purpose of maximising their contribution to Swedish economic growth, thus putting them in a vulnerable position which is likely to reduce their capability for work (Bonvin 2009).     

The experimental psychology of attitude change and the tradition of classical rhetoric

Social psychologists might be surprised to learn that their discipline has been cut off from a vast and ancient family tree. The study of attitude change in the context of experimental social psychology began around 1918. It developed into a defined discipline in the 1930s and 1940s, particularly through the work of Carl Hovland and his associates. Unlike earlier specialties in experimental psychology, social psychology emerged well after the 19th-century split between psychology and philosophy in college curricula. Before this period of growth in empirical teaching and practice, the study of persuasion in classical rhetoric was a bedrock of higher education for more than 2000 years. Because of social psychology's late development in empirical science, there is a historical disconnect between experimental social psychology and its ancient philosophical counterpart, classical rhetoric. This article demonstrates similarities and differences between Hovland's findings and the theoretical groundings of classical rhetoric. We suggest areas where modern social psychology might benefit from a look at the older, more holistic theories of the art of rhetoric.     

Kognitive Mobilität. Eine makroskopische Untersuchung der Wanderung von Wissenschaftlern zwischen Forschungsgebieten am Beispiel der Mathematik

Cognitive Mobility, a Macroscopic Investigation of Migration of Scientists between Research Fields Studied by Example of Mathematics. — In history of science, scientific migrations of famous scientists are well-known. Nothing is known, however, about the total of migrations between fields of science, despite the importance of scientific mobility for information transfer and exchange. In the present investigation all migrations between the major 39 subdisciplines of mathematics from 1959 through 1975 are studied in a macroscopic manner. The quantitative importance of migration for the development of mathematical fields is assessed. In an analysis of the relationship between the affinity of fields and mobility between them a „principle of least migration distance” is established. Furthermore, some aspects of a Markov-chain treatment of scientific mobility are discussed. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

“How Do You Know Unless You Look?”: Brain Imaging, Biopower and Practical Neuroscience

Brain imaging is a persuasive visual rhetoric by which neuroscience is articulated as relevant to the construction and maintenance of desirable selves. In this essay, I describe how "brain-based self-help" literature disseminates neuroscientific vocabularies to public audiences. In this genre, brain images are an authoritative visual resource for translating neuroscience into a comprehensive program for living. I use Foucault's discussion of biopower to describe the ways in which brain-based self-help literature enables self-constitution in a biosocial age where health is a central means of communicating personal worth, social value and political order. The implications of this continuous self-fashioning are not limited to the personal realm but have important political consequences.     

The Other Side of their Zeal

Abstract

This article tracks the harsh reality of homophobia in Korea, focusing on the homophobic rhetoric of Korean Christian fundamentalists. I suggest that the fundamentalists’ homophobic rhetoric can be looked at in line with their attempt to build up their bases of support. Facing the loss of their privileged social status in Korea, the fundamentalists have been seeking out a secure road through which they can survive and regain their influence. What they have found was, in addition to literal belief in the Bible, a political alliance with greater powers, namely, Korean right-wing politics and american Christian fundamentalism. Korean fundamentalists’ homophobic rhetoric reveals a crack through which we can observe how they have served as resident ministers of american Christian fundamentalists’ imperialistic vision of the world. This vision couples with the US government’s military deployments and its projects for global domination—whether it is to be proved as an unqualified failure or not.     

Manifest Rationality Reconsidered: Reply to my Fellow Symposiasts

In this paper, I respond to papers on my Manifest Rationality (2000) by Leo Groarke, Hans Hansen, David Hitchcock, and Christopher Tindale presented at the meetings of the Ontario Philosophical Society, October 2000. From the many useful challenges they have directed at my position, I have chosen to focus on two. The dominant issue raised by their papers concerns my definition of argument, and particularly problems with the idea of a dialectical tier. I have selected that as the first strand. Second, several have raised questions that deal with the relationship between logic, rhetoric and dialectic. That is the second strand.