Virginia Tech
    • Log in
    View Item 
    •   VTechWorks Home
    • VTechWorks Archives
    • Conference Proceedings
    • Veterans in Society
    • Veterans in Society 2014: Humanizing the Discourse
    • View Item
    •   VTechWorks Home
    • VTechWorks Archives
    • Conference Proceedings
    • Veterans in Society
    • Veterans in Society 2014: Humanizing the Discourse
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Bridging a Gap Between Knowledge and Experience: Civilian Views of Military Service

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Hayek_Bridging_Gap_Knowledge.pdf (190.0Kb)
    Downloads: 256
    Date
    2014-04
    Author
    Hayek, Philip
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Assume that knowledge can never exceed experience. In the case of studying the military and veterans’ issues, then, how much can a civilian understand, or how much credibility might a civilian have to leverage when making claims about ideology, motives, or identity concerning veterans? Are the experiences of veterans insulated from the public in a way that deflects any possible judgment from outsiders, from civilians? Consider the value judgments concerning the military that reveal a certain binary opposition: I support the troops (read: thank god it’s not me) or I’m anti-military (read: I wouldn’t go if you paid me). Both positions have no hope of catching alive the idea of being a part of that military institution. Can anyone outside of the realm of experience observe, or “know,” and therefore form value judgments about veterans? In this paper, Enlightenment- and Progressive-era rhetoricians like Hugh Blair, Richard Whately, and Wayne Booth, among others, offer insights into how the attitude of the American public and the common sense we share plays a role in defining the tastefulness, or appropriateness, of discourse about veterans. A change in society’s common understanding of what is tasteful will not only limit how ideas are formed, but these boundaries will disqualify any ideas or discourse outside of what is accepted as tasteful. The articulation of our nation’s sentiment surrounding veterans is constricted not only by what is considered tasteful but also by a perceived and actual distance between civilians and military personnel. The burden of proof for arguments concerning the military and veterans rests on civilians who will never have access to the knowledge that experience places in the hands of veterans. Rhetorically, veterans share a common sense language that is removed from the general population, and therefore from popular opinion. Insights from rhetorical theory can be a productive starting point from which to study how veterans as a population resist any value judgments from civilians that fall outside the binary opposition of for or against.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10919/56358
    Collections
    • Veterans in Society 2014: Humanizing the Discourse [14]
    • Veterans in Society 2014: Humanizing the Discourse, Center for the Study of Rhetoric in Society [14]

    If you believe that any material in VTechWorks should be removed, please see our policy and procedure for Requesting that Material be Amended or Removed. All takedown requests will be promptly acknowledged and investigated.

    Virginia Tech | University Libraries | Contact Us
     

     

    VTechWorks

    AboutPoliciesHelp

    Browse

    All of VTechWorksCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    Log inRegister

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics

    If you believe that any material in VTechWorks should be removed, please see our policy and procedure for Requesting that Material be Amended or Removed. All takedown requests will be promptly acknowledged and investigated.

    Virginia Tech | University Libraries | Contact Us