Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Speech and Rhetorical Studies Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Afghanistan (1)
- Articles on Law and Politics (1)
- Articles on Literature and Philosophy (1)
- Common Ground (1)
- Conspiracy Theories (1)
-
- Counterinsurgency (1)
- Deliberative Democracy (1)
- Dissensus (1)
- Guttmann (1)
- Habermas (1)
- ISAF (1)
- Ideological Belief (1)
- Information Operations (1)
- NATO (1)
- Philosophical Belief (1)
- Public Affairs (1)
- Public Diplomacy (1)
- Public Opinion (1)
- Quine (1)
- Rationally Motivated Consensus (1)
- Rawls (1)
- Reasonable Disagreement (1)
- Religious Belief (1)
- Strategic Communication (1)
- Strategic Communication & Narratives (1)
- Strategic Narratives (1)
- Web of Belief (1)
- Web of Faith (1)
- Publication
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Speech and Rhetorical Studies
Winning The Story War: Strategic Communication And The Conflict In Afghanistan, George Dimitriu
Winning The Story War: Strategic Communication And The Conflict In Afghanistan, George Dimitriu
George Dimitriu
In conflicts of the information age success in the application of force depends less on the outcome of tactical operations on the battlefields but more on how the war's purpose, course and conduct is viewed by public opinion at home as well as within the theatre of operations. Therefore western allies in Iraq and Afghanistan are not only involved in a physical struggle but also in a struggle over perceptions, for no long-term engagement of troops is possible without support from home, nor can a counterinsurgency succeed without the support of the local population. While the ability to exert influence …
Webs Of Faith As A Source Of Reasonable Disagreement, Gregory Brazeal
Webs Of Faith As A Source Of Reasonable Disagreement, Gregory Brazeal
Gregory Brazeal
Contemporary political theorists and philosophers of epistemology and religion have often drawn attention to the problem of reasonable disagreement. The idea that deliberators may reasonably persist in a disagreement even under ideal deliberative conditions and even over the long term poses a challenge to the common assumption that rationality should lead to consensus. This essay proposes a previously unrecognized source of reasonable disagreement, based on the notion that an individual's beliefs are rationally related to one another in a fabric of sentences or web of beliefs. The essay argues that an individual's beliefs may not form a single, seamless web, …