 | |  |  | 

For over thirty years, “humanistic” theorists in the field of technical communication have attempted to link it to the more established academic disciplines of rhetoric and literary theory. These theorists, such as Carolyn Miller and David Dobrin, have based their attempts on the following (grossly simplified) logic: objectivity, in language as well as reality, is a sham; therefore, those of us in technical communication do not objectively report reality, but rather, persuade readers to accept reality as we see it; furthermore, to claim that we do anything less is to distort the truth. Patrick Moore subscribes to an opposing view termed “positivist,” yet it is so universally panned that no one outside the sciences presently dares embrace it. Moore notes that Miller “expresses her concern that technical communication is ‘coercive’”, and goes on to cite other humanistic theorists, such as Dobrin and Charles Bazerman, who try to make technical communication theory dance to the tune of rhetoric, which is more pleasing to their ears. View both works by deMaagd, Christian View all 54 works published by Orange Journal, The |
 Tell It Like It Is: Rehabilitating Positivism in Technical Communication http://orange.eserver.org/issues/2-4/cedemaagd.htm
deMaagd, Christian Orange Journal, The 2001
Abstract: For over thirty years, “humanistic” theorists in the field of technical communication have attempted to link it to the more established academic disciplines of rhetoric and literary theory. These theorists, such as Carolyn Miller and David Dobrin, have based their attempts on the following (grossly simplified) logic: objectivity, in language as well as reality, is a sham; therefore, those of us in technical communication do not objectively report reality, but rather, persuade readers to accept reality as we see it; furthermore, to claim that we do anything less is to distort the truth. Patrick Moore subscribes to an opposing view termed “positivist,” yet it is so universally panned that no one outside the sciences presently dares embrace it. Moore notes that Miller “expresses her concern that technical communication is ‘coercive’”, and goes on to cite other humanistic theorists, such as Dobrin and Charles Bazerman, who try to make technical communication theory dance to the tune of rhetoric, which is more pleasing to their ears.
|
 |
 |  |