Composition and the new science: Chaos, expressionism, and social-epistemic rhetoric

Composition and rhetoric has emerged in conflict. However, not unlike dialogic processes that inform established disciplines such as physics or chemistry, the conversations, debates, and inquiries that have structured the work of compositionists are characterized by common goals. These shared concerns have created coherence within our competing theories and practices. One common goal that has motivated compositionists is that of comprehending the nature of the writing processes successful writers use to create effective arguments.; Since the "origins" of contemporary composition and rhetoric programs in the early 1960's, many compositionists have suspected that in order to comprehend what makes writing successful, one must understand the roles of chaos within those processes. A concurrent phenomenon manifested at this same time within various sciences--physics, mathematics, and meteorology, for example. Scientists were experiencing a shift in their epistemological orientations regarding chaos. Chaos was coming to be seen not as the polar opposite of order but as capable of generating order itself. Leading scientists exploring chaotic dynamics also found that chaos contained deep structures of order within it. These discoveries signaled the third major scientific revolution of the 20th century (along with Relativity and Quantum Physics).; This epistemological shift in the sciences has informed the work of compositionists. Direct corollaries are problematic, as discipline-specific knowledges cannot traverse academic boundaries and exist, unchanged and intact, within another field. Still, as many compositionists, literary theorists, social scientists, and today, even physicists have argued, knowledges may imbricate across disciplines.; This study offers a historical view of composition and rhetoric, a field that emerged with a particular interest in the roles of chaos in writing processes, arguing that shifting scientific epistemologies regarding chaos have resonated within our work. Expressionist rhetorics have demonstrated a willingness to consider chaos as a valuable, even crucial part of the writing process. Similarly, social epistemic rhetorics have shown that the making of meaning through writing is a chaotic process conceived of as more complex than ever before. This study concludes that chaos theory resonates within both expressionist and social epistemic rhetorics, allowing for the elusive hope of agency through writing, even in a postmodern (academic) culture.