A rhetorical perspective on conspiracies
The Stamina case
Roberta Martina Zagarella | National Research Council, Institute of Biomedical Technologies
Marco Annoni | National Research Council, Institute of Biomedical Technologies
In this paper, we analyze the persuasive effects of conspiracy
theories from a rhetorical and argumentative perspective. In particular, we
scrutinize a case-study – the story of the “Stamina cure” in Italy –,
interpreting it as a particular instance of conspiracy theory. First, we explain
what conspiracy theories are, and why they are relevant within the contemporary
health debate. Second, we situate our analysis in relation to other theoretical
accounts, explaining why a discursive approach may be required to study
conspiracies. Third, we investigate our case-study through the lenses of the
three “entechnic” proofs of rhetoric: logos, ethos, and
pathos. We conclude that a rhetorical approach can shed
significant light on how conspiracies achieve their persuasive effect and it
provides a first step toward the elaboration of a more comprehensive model to
better address the practical and political implications of conspiracy
argumentations.
Keywords: conspiracy theories, health communication, inference, Stamina case, rhetoric
Article outline
- 1.Introduction: The Stamina case and its persuasive effects
- 2.Conspiracy theories and their contemporary relevance
- 3.Comparing different approaches to the study of CTs
- 4.A rhetorical analysis of the Stamina case: Logos
- 5.A rhetorical analysis of the Stamina case: Ethos
- 6.A rhetorical analysis of the Stamina case: Pathos
- 7.Conclusions
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
Published online: 25 September 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.18006.zag
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.18006.zag
References
Amossy, Ruth and Roselyne Koren
Angenot, Marc
Brotherton, Rob and Christopher C. French
Brotherton, Rob, Christopher C. French and Alan D. Pickering
Buckley, Thea
Capocci, Mauro and Gilberto Corbellini
Cattaneo, Elena and Gilberto Corbellini
Danblon, Emmanuelle
Danblon, Emmanuelle and Loïc Nicolas
French, Christopher C. and Anna Stone
Greenwald, Glenn and Ewen MacAskill
Hamilton, Lawrence C.
Hofstadter, Richard
Kahan, Dan M., Ellen Peters, Maggie Wittlin, Paul Slovic, Lisa Larrimore Ouellette, Donald Braman and Gregory Mandel
Klonoff, Elizabeth A. and Hope Landrine
Labinaz, Paolo and Marina Sbisà
Leman, Patrick J. and Marco Cinnirella
Lewandowsky, Stephan, Gilles E. Gignac and Klaus Oberauer
Lewandowsky, Stephan, Klaus Oberauer and Gilles E. Gignac
Miller, Joanne M., Kyle L. Saunders and Christina E. Farhart
Nicolas, Loïc
Oliver, J. Eric and Thomas J. Wood
Oswald, Steve
2016 “Conspiracy and bias: argumentative features and persuasiveness of
conspiracy theories.” OSSA Conference Archive 1681. http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/papersandcommentaries/168
Oswald, Steve and Thierry Herman
Peirce, Charles Sanders
Quattrociocchi, Walter and Antonella Vicini
Ross, Michael W., E. James Essien and Isabel Torres
Serra, Mauro
Sunstein, Cass
Sunstein, Cass R. and Adrian Vermeule
Swami, Viren, Rebecca Coles, Stefan Stieger, Jakob Pietschnig, Adrian Furnham, Sherry Rehim and Martin Voracek
Taïeb, Emmanuel
Wood, Michael J. and Karen M. Douglas
Yazdannik, Ahmadreza, Alireza Yousefy and Sepideh Mohammadi
Zagarella, Roberta Martina and Annoni, Marco
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
Mohammed, Dima & Maria Grazia Rossi
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.