Paging Paul Krugman: Toward a <i>Topoi</i> of an Exemplar Public Intellectual in the Natural and Physical Sciences

Michael J. Zerbe York College of Pennsylvania

Abstract

American economist Paul Krugman has become a highly influential public intellectual in the social sciences. The natural and physical sciences need a public intellectual like Krugman to make more effective arguments for the existence and urgency of climate change, the benefits of vaccine use, and other pressing issues. To demonstrate how such a goal can be achieved, this article presents a rhetorical analysis of Krugman’s public intellectual writing in The New York Times from 2013 to 2016. The substantial public impact of this body of work stems from Krugman’s use of rhetorical strategies that are both similar to and—more importantly—a departure from strategies used by other well-known public intellectuals in the sciences.

Journal
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Published
2019-01-01
DOI
10.1177/0047281618754723
Open Access
Closed
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. Rhetoric Society Quarterly

Cites in this index (8)

  1. Rhetoric Society Quarterly
  2. Rhetoric & Public Affairs
  3. Rhetoric & Public Affairs
  4. Rhetoric Society Quarterly
  5. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Show all 8 →
  1. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  2. College Composition and Communication
  3. College Composition and Communication
Also cites 48 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1177/1075547012454949
  2. Allum, N. (2011). What makes some people think astrology is scientific? Science Communication, 33(3), 341–366.
  3. 10.1177/0963662512449598
  4. 10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.9
  5. 10.1177/1075547015597911
  6. 10.2105/AJPH.2014.302241
  7. 10.1080/00335638609383782
  8. 10.7208/chicago/9780226099088.001.0001
  9. 10.14321/j.ctt7zt5wp
  10. 10.1177/0963662512437330
  11. 10.1017/CBO9780511485060
  12. Doering-Manteuffel, S. (2011). Survival of occult practices and ideas in modern common sense. Public Understa…
  13. 10.1177/1075547012472685
  14. 10.1177/0963662513501741
  15. 10.1177/1075547013520240
  16. 10.1177/1075547011417890
  17. 10.1093/oso/9780195117509.001.0001
  18. 10.1007/s12115-008-9159-4
  19. 10.1007/s10767-012-9128-1
  20. 10.1080/00335631003796669
  21. Harambam, J. & Aupers, S. (2015). Contesting epistemic authority: Conspiracy theories on the boundaries of sc…
  22. 10.2307/378102
  23. 10.1088/0963-6625/9/4/304
  24. 10.22323/2.10020201
  25. 10.1177/1075547014534076
  26. 10.1088/1748-9326/8/4/044029
  27. 10.1017/CBO9780511488825
  28. 10.1353/rap.0.0093
  29. 10.1080/15265161.2011.623818
  30. 10.1162/152651604773067514
  31. 10.1057/9781137017581
  32. 10.1177/0963662513511175
  33. 10.4159/9780674042278
  34. 10.1177/0963662514546299
  35. 10.1080/09505431.2013.801420
  36. 10.22323/2.12030204
  37. 10.1177/0963662514537028
  38. 10.1002/9780470775967.ch
  39. 10.1007/s12115-008-9177-2
  40. 10.1179/0308018815Z.000000000118
  41. 10.1007/s12108-006-1022-8
  42. 10.1215/08992363-2798343
  43. 10.1177/0963662515577883
  44. 10.1080/10570317609373907
  45. 10.1177/0963662510394278
  46. 10.1007/s12115-010-9355-x
  47. 10.1353/con.2016.0016
  48. 10.1111/j.1467-8330.2008.00618.x
CrossRef global citation count: 4 View in citation network →