CHAÏM PERELMAN’S CONCEPTION OF RHETORIC: A PHILOSOPHY OF DIALOGUE (by ZACHARIE WASUKUNDI)

I first met Fr. Zacharie Wasukundi when he came to Assumption University to take classes taught in English. He was enrolled in my second-level Philosophy class, The Human Difference where we studied such authors as Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, René Descartes, Karl Marx, Jean-Paul Sartre, Friedrich Nietzsche and Edward Osborne Wilson. Fr. Zacharie had more experience studying philosophy than the other students in the class and his observations about these writers proved very helpful. In this book, Fr. Zacharie examines the writings of the twentieth-century European philosopher, Chaïm Perelman. In particular, he examines whether Perelman’s approach to Rhetoric can be helpful in dealing with some of the serious problems of miscommunication that has led to so much discord and conflict in contemporary Africa. Does the “new” or contemporary Rhetoric, with its emphasis on the “two-way” communication offer a viable alternative to the “one-way” communication of classical rhetoric? Is the Perelmanean approach, with an anthropology that defines man as a “communal” and “relational” being, superior to the classical rhetorical tradition of Aristotle which defines man as a “rational animal”? Since this new rhetoric is based on a philosophy of dialogue, does it provide a framework for a negotiation process needed to resolve the challenges facing twentieth century Africa? Although Fr. Zacharie appreciates many of the qualities of Perelman’s new Rhetoric, such as its emphasis on the principles of contextuality, changeability and possibility, and with the rhetorical methods of flexibility, adaptability and acceptability, he wonders if it is sufficient to deal with these problems. While Perelman’s approach assumes that the negotiation process takes place in the context of a common language and shared worldview between two discussants who are both normal, reasonable and competent, the situation in contemporary Africa is often between two people who don’t agree about their mutual needs and problems and who are facing conflicts and wars. Fr. Zacharie’s thoughtful assessment of the situation forces the reader to wonder about the best approaches to this complex issue. Is Fr. Zacharie’s proposal for a mediation process to facilitate communication between two people who don’t agree on their mutual needs and problems a preferable alternative to Perelman’s new rhetoric and philosophy of dialogue? This work provides the opportunity for serious reflection by people who are concerned about the conflicts in contemporary Africa, including those in Fr. Zacharie’s native country, the Democratic Republic of the Congo.