Abstract

The ideological break from the tradition of rhetorical theory and criticism resulted in polarization that obscured details and relations among participants in the debate. The great divide was between the classical, modernist, and scientific assumptions of tradition versus the skeptical and postmodern leaning of ideologiekritik. The polar term and cluster analysis revealed how complex relations were built and supported at multiple levels. Multiple focuses for the criticism of world affairs were discovered; three different levels for academic debate were discovered; and the deeper theoretical movements of pure integration and postmodern dispersion were revealed. The primary implication was that the multiple levels of the debate and therefore the field should be understood as reciprocal and complementary clusters of support that define and revise the individual bodies colliding