| dbp:text
|
- These types (en)
- The way the Sciences and the Humanities study the phenomena that surround us differ greatly in the amount of researcher personality allowed to influence the results of the study. For example, in the Sciences researchers purposefully adhere to a method .... Generally speaking, the researcher's personality, likes and dislikes, and religious and political preferences are supposed to be as far removed as possible from the actual study....
In sharp contrast, criticism actively involves the personality of the researcher. The very choices of what to study, and how and why to study a rhetorical artifact are heavily influenced by the personal qualities of the researcher.... In the Humanities, methods of research may also take many forms—criticism, ethnography, for example—but the personality of the researcher is an integral component of the study. Further personalizing criticism, we find that rhetorical critics use a variety of means when examining a particular rhetorical artifact, with some critics even developing their own unique perspective to better examine a rhetorical artifact. (en)
- a broad method (en)
- an objective theory (en)
- decreased in explicit coverage (en)
- those terms (en)
- in a new way which offers context of practical arguments (en)
|
.jpg?width=300)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
