(12-28-2021, 05:25 PM)mavsluvr Wrote: Well, this seems to have produced a little merriment.
There are whole books on the subject, but to make a long story short, one might think of Everyman as a human character. He does not present himself as an expert or power figure. He comes across as an ordinary, humble inquirer in search of truth. He has an appealing personality that listeners find easy to identify with. He presents his conclusions as the suggested fruits of his truth-seeking inquiry, and listeners may be influenced to be receptive to his points of view by his non-threatening approach, his general likeability, and his "learner" persona. Ideally, the listeners don't even realize they have been persuaded, but come to believe that the conclusions were their own ideas.
I am not presenting this as a bad thing. Rhetorical devices, as you know, are just means of persuasion, and are neutral in a vacuum.
As far as the scholarly dialogue, it's not all that hoity-toity. It is distinguished from advocacy in the sense that, rather than having a discussion for the purpose of winning an argument, it is conducted for the purpose of collecting various points of view and sources of information in hopes of bringing all participants closer to the truth. As such, it fits in well with the Everyman device. Lawyers looking for an accurate state of affairs or learning an opponent's case tend to be into it, along with academics. A lot of sports fans aren't, somewhat to my surprise.
Well, I'm sure you already knew all this, but in hopes of demonstrating the "ordinariness" of these down-to-earth concepts, I have further explicated. If you still want to poke fun, I'm actually okay with that, lol.
Oh, mavsluvr, my "poking fun" really was just having fun, not poking. It sure wasn't meant to be at your expense, and if it was, my bad!!
I actually hadn't thought through "everyman" as a rhetorical device. I got a communications minnor, my first time in school, in the early 90's, but I don't remember any good discussion on rhetoric. I probably would have enjoyed literature as a minor more than my communications classes. Anyway, after your comment, I spent some of my time where I'm supposed to working asking Google about "everyman" and "rhetorical devices". It reminded me that I've read Everyman. And it also lead me to some content similar to what you shared above. Thanks for sharing!! It's kind that you suggest that I come accross like that, but typically, whatever style I employ is just "how I talk or think".
Regarding "scholarly dialogue", I love the idea of a self correcting community that grows in knowledge and wisdom together via good, honest, detaiiled, unselfish communication. The scientific method and the peer review process have served humanity well! I'm not a scientist, or anthing more than an amature scholar, but I sure do appreciate peer reviewed content made accessible to us lay folk, especially in the genres of natrual science and Biblical studies.
An aside, there is a fun forum that I visit called Peaceful Science where I watch scientists and non-scientists argue with each other. It's located here: https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/. The discussion breaks down into all of the wrong ways to discuss things on which the internet majors on at times. But sometimes, you get a glimpse of some really smart people discussing things that might approach good scholarly dialogue.