Abstract
The following commentary follows on and flows out of an initial response to reading “Multiple Voices on Authorship and Authority in Biomedical Publications” by DeTora and colleagues (2020), which appeared in volume 3 issue 4 of Rhetoric of Health and Medicine. This response, by rhetorician of science, health, and medicine Celeste Condit, begins by situating questions about authorship and authority in biomedicine against a classical rhetorical source, Plato’s Gorgias. In so doing, Condit identifies a messy truth—that rhetoric potentially can pose dangers when applied to health and medicine. The authors then construct a Platonic dialogue that situates authorship, ethos, and authority in the context of biomedicine. Ultimately, the two authors illustrate the messiness that results when attempting to mount a discussion of these terms across intellectual registers.
- Journal
- Rhetoric of Health and Medicine
- Published
- 2020-10-24
- DOI
- 10.5744/rhm.2021.1005
- CompPile
- Search in CompPile ↗
- Topics
Citation Context
Cited by in this index (0)
No articles in this index cite this work.
Cites in this index (0)
No references match articles in this index.
Related Articles
-
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication Apr 2013Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century Falconry Manuals: Technical Writing with a Classical Rhetorical Influence ↗John T. Battalio
-
Written Communication Jul 2000JAMES L. KINNEAVY; CATHERINE R. ESKIN
-
Written Communication Jan 1994JAMES L. KINNEAVY; CATHERINE R. ESKIN
-
Business and Professional Communication Quarterly Apr 2025Nguyen Thi Hoang Bau; Thai Le Thuy Trang
-
Rhetoric Society Quarterly Mar 2025Sarah Hart Micke; Angela Sowa; Lisl Davies; Emily Graboski; Maya Piñón