Abstract
Studies of the role of rhetoric in religious experience have most often focused on mass revival preaching from either an Aristotelian or psychological stance. The first assumes that conversion is the result of rhetorical technique; while the second assumes that conversion is the result of mental instability, psychopathology, or mass hypnosis. Both approaches share the prior assumption that the experience is not genuine, but is the result of deception or manipulation. This study examines the ways that traditional assumptions have led critics to make judgments about the genuineness of the experience, which contributes to only a partial understanding of rhetoric and religious experience. This study then asks how critics might approach the study of the function of rhetoric in religious experience without either repudiating or endorsing the particular beliefs of those who undergo the experience by examining three recent studies that depart from simple assumptions of cause and effect. The study concludes with a short examination of one type of religious experience that has received little attention from rhetorical critics.
Journal Title
Iowa Journal of Communication
Volume
28
Issue
2
First Page
25
Last Page
47
Language
en
File Format
application/pdf
Recommended Citation
Books, Gregory J.
(1996)
"The Role(s) of Rhetoric in Religious Experience,"
Iowa Journal of Communication: Vol. 28:
No.
2, Article 4.
Available at:
https://scholarworks.uni.edu/ijc/vol28/iss2/4
Copyright
©1996 Iowa Communication Association
