Classifying Communibiology's Texts: Implications for Genre Theory

Abstract

One can categorize communibiological texts as interdisciplinary inspirational texts. However, one can classify these texts differently with equal plausibility by attending to aspects of the social psychology and economic conditions of current science that are rarely considered by most rhetoricians of science and attending to 2 significant rhetorical requirements of successful scientific texts-programmaticality and interestingness-that have gone unnoticed by rhetoricians of science to date. Given this equality of categorization plausibility, traditional genre theories are contradicted. More significantly, through the author's provision of a reflexive analysis, pragmatist genre theory is supported and extended. Thus, this article contributes to genre theory and the rhetoric of science.

Point, Counterpoint, to the Side of the Point, and Other Points of Interest in the Latest Debate About Communibiological Theory: A Response to Nelson, McCroskey, and Beatty

“…When and in what ways should we pursue theory that synthesizes biological and meaning-centered processes? I have written this essay to argue that Nelson's (2004) and Biological Abstracts/RRM (1993)(1994)(1995)(1996)(1997)(1998)(1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004), using "communibiology" and the authors' last names as terms in separate searches, turned up seven articles, including publications in Psychological Reports (three in 1984 and one in 1990), Perceptual andMotor Skills (one each in 1983 and1985), and Journal of Genetic Psychology (one in 1985). None mentioned communibiology.…”