Hayles suggests that the mind without the body does not exist (246). This means that the body contains some value, a contradiction to the Matrix, where if the mind dies the body as its servant also perishes. This is a continuous debate, but how does this relate to the study of rhetoric?
The mind is credited with a higher value than that of the body, for the mind is the language epicenter. It makes use of language either as the generator, or interpreter. In an Aristotelian sense, it is the mind that uses language for persuasion; hence, the perception of it having greater value than that of the body. On the other hand, from a Burkean point of view, language is generated as a form of identity. In today’s world it is the body, which gives us our identity. In the social context, we not only read, but we are read (Lefebvre 95). Our identity is based upon gender, race, religious preference, sexual orientation, and other socio-political-economic factors. These categories thingify our identities, which in-turn affects how we interact within the institutions of society. In this sense, the body is more valuable than the mind.
Essentially, this plays out in the study of rhetoric, because a writer strives to be heard, to establish a voice. This voice comes from identity, and identity lays the foundation by which language will be used as a means of persuasion. Therefore, Hayles is correct to say that the mind is not the mind without the body (246).
No comments:
Post a Comment