Even more on Fisher

Fisher makes it out like his paradigm is superior to the rational paradigm in two ways. One is that it just works better. I don’t have an argument to make against that. But he also indicates that narrative is better in an ethical sense; he calls it more democratic (273). The word democratic is loaded though. It is what McGee calls an ideograph (428). A mythic word that symbolizes many values. Democracy stands for a way of governing that is good. Fisher tries to tell us that narrative is more fair because everyone gets to have a say regardless of their education, status etc. But this makes it sound like everyone does not already get to say what they want. Maybe they don’t, but we need to divide this into two issues. One issue involves who is allowed to speak versus who is not. The other issue needs to be decided after we decide who gets to speak. The question then becomes: How should we speak, in narrative or rational? Let’s not get sidetracked with his correct but unhelpful assertion that even rational is narrative. I think Fisher is promoting the use of narratives by individuals when he should stick to the first issue and, like Habermas, focus on trying to bring everyone to the table, even if they have to use narrative when they get there.
I think that the narrative format can be deceptive and used for immoral purposes. In fact I think that more often than not this is the case. Further I think that people who tell stories know they are twisting reality. I also think that rational people, while they may be incorrect in their reasoning and even unintentionally unethical, are being sincere in their attempt to be rational. So in summary I think and feel that rational people are being genuine more often than narrative people. I have no scientific evidence to back this up nor do I think we can really determine the truth of it either way. But if I am wrong about this I do not want to stay wrong. I just need to be convinced that either I am wrong, or at least that voicing my opinion could cause more harm than good. I am open to discussion about this.
But I think that Fisher and the rest of us should be focusing on trying to get people to use their narratives in ways that are beneficial and genuine and helpful to others, not themselves. Therapy, as we have discussed, is an ideal place for this. More and more I see the use for stories in therapy. My therapy instructor used stories to teach class and showed us how important they are to doing therapy. But I do not like the idealization of narratives and the demonization of rational thinking procedures.

Fisher, Walter R. “Narration as a Human Communication Paradigm: The Case of Public Moral Argument.“ Contemporary Rhetorical Theory: A Reader. Ed. John Louis Lucaites, Celeste Michelle Condit, and Sally Caudill. New York: Guilford Press, 1999. 265-87.

Habermas, Jurgen. “The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia Article (1964).” New German Critique 3 (1974): 49-55. Trans. Sara Lennox and Frank Lennox.

McGee, Michael Calvin. “The “Ideograph”: A Link Between Rhetoric and Ideology.” Contemporary Rhetorical Theory: A Reader. Ed. John Louis Lucaites, Celeste Michelle Condit, and Sally Caudill. New York: Guilford Press, 1999. 425-40.