Article Title
Abstract
The concept of parrhesia, or free speech, was explored by the philosopher Michel Foucault to describe the discourse between a person of high political power and a subordinate, wherein the subordinate is risking his own well-being or freedom in order to convey an unwelcome truth. In Foucault’s Discourse and Truth lectures, he briefly entertains a link between political rhetoric and parrhesia before dismissing the concepts as completely incompatible. According to Foucault, parrhesia requires a dialectic format and a real threat to the speaker, and rhetorical speeches lack both. However, the scholar of Greek philosophy, Laurent Pernot, hosted a lecture at the University of Southern Mississippi that focused on how the two concepts may be compatible, referencing the distinction between emotional rhetoric and political parrhesia. A link between Foucault’s parrhesia and Pernot’s concept of rhetoric may be fleshed out with the help of the concept of modernity from Foucault’s “What is Englightenment?” essay.
Recommended Citation
Townsend, Jessica
(2017)
"Political Rhetoric: The Modern Parrhesia,"
The Catalyst: Vol. 4:
Iss.
1, Article 5.
DOI: 10.18785/cat.0401.05
Available at:
https://aquila.usm.edu/southernmisscatalyst/vol4/iss1/5
