The cultural construction of American societal responses to the HIV/AIDS pandemic and terrorism is addressed. The use of metaphors of war, survival, extinction, and of those related to God in public narratives is analyzed. Issues of gender, sexuality, money, and power are also discussed within the context of the religion‐science dialogue. Suggestions are made about a possibility for a global ethic of survival based on an ethic of care.

This essay argues that Aristotle's categories of oratory are not as useful in judging the methods of Sophistical rhetoric as his presentation of time. The Sophistical argumentative method of “making the weaker the stronger case” is re-evaluated as a political practice. After showing this argument's relation to power and ideology, Aristotle's philosophy, which privileges a procedure of argument consistent with the politics of a polis-ideal rhetoric, is offered as reason for objecting to Sophistical rhetoric. The essay concludes that Sophistical rhetoric (...) prefers the concept of possibility over Aristotelian actuality, and offers a need for an ideological space of radical, generative possibility in rhetorical theory. (shrink)