Presence, Analogy, and Earth in the Balance

Abstract

Vice-President Albert Gore, Jr.'s bestselling book on environment, Earth In Balance, has generated a storm of controversy. Admirers, such as Lance Morrow of Time magazine and Martin Peretz of New Republic, argue that Gore speaks with a certain rare passionate authenticity, a ring of unfakable that is rare enough in (usually ghostwritten) outpourings of politicians (Morrow, 1992). Such opinions won Gore 13th annual Robert F. Kennedy Book Award. Detractors, on other hand, call Gore an out-and-out radical and maintain that the heart of his world view is an apocalyptic vision of an Earth teetering on brink of destruction (Bailey, 1992). They dispute Gore's evidence (Lucian, 1992) and come close accusing him of deception (Easterbrook, 1992). The heart of book, and sections that make supporters and detractors Gore most uncomfortable, consists of three analogies. The first is Gore's comparison of nuclear war environmental difficulties facing world. The second, and most disconcerting, is Gore's likening of civilization's relationship earth with that of a dysfunctional family. The third is a familiar one; he compares effort needed Marshall plan. These three analogies focus argument of book. The first provides an interpretive framework for magnitude of problem; second suggests a language describe spiritual issues behind problem and solution; third structures proposals necessary save Earth. Gore's use of analogies gives book its rhetorical power or, in Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca's terms, gives his arguments. The ill-defined concept of has tantalized argumentation scholars since English translation of The New Rhetoric in 1969. As Karon (1989) argues, presence, loosely translated as attention paid or importance accorded an argument, is a critical element in rhetorical theory of Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca; if goal of argument is to induce or increase mind's adherence theses presented for its assent (1969, p. 4), then attention granted those theses is of utmost salience. Presence, Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca state, is of paramount importance technique of Yet is ambiguous. Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca identify it as both a psychological and a rational mode of argumentation. Its relationship rest of their rhetorical theory is uncertain. There is no analysis of its role in uses of analogy, metaphor, example, quasi-logical argumentation, or any of other strategies Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca forward. The secondary literature is equally scant. Only Karon (1989) and Kauffman and Parson (1990), and Leroux (1992) comment upon presence at length. Karon's intriguing analysis is concerned with what presence reveals about Perelman's epistemology. Kauffman and Parson comment insightfully on relationship between metaphor and presence, but they are interested in use of dead metaphors. Rather than detailing of presence, they study strategic absence of presence. Leroux (1992) opens most useful path an analysis of presence. His discussion of presence, situated within development of a critical vocabulary for understanding of style, emphasizes function of presence. He argues that style is initial encounter through which auditors apprehend meaning and that presence, treated as a stylistic device rather than a philosophical concept, can be useful for understanding the language variations and tactics [that] can enlarge or vivify a subject. Leroux notes important role that analogy can play in creating presence and suggests that presence is one way through which critics can collapse troublesome form/content distinction. In this essay, I extend work of these authors, particularly Leroux, by exploring relationship between analogy and presence through a critique of Earth in Balance. …