Reply: Campbell, Karlyn Kohrs. “Biesecker Cannot Speak for Her Either.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 26.2 (1993): 153-159. (7 pages)
Campbell levels some pretty harshly worded criticism of Biesecker’s piece, “Coming to Terms”. Of note, she is baffled by Biesecker’s focus/attack on the woman “who is trying to alter the rhetorical landscape” rather than the men who built that landscape (154). Campbell also confronts Biesecker’s attack on her concept of consciousness raising: Biesecker is skeptical of what she calls “the talking cure”, but Campbell offers the historical origins of the talking cure which originated with Freud where the woman would ‘talk’ to the male therapist who “kept silent, viewed women as defective men, and occasionally pointed out contradictions in the patient’s remarks” (157). Instead, Campbell places the origins of consciousness raising to “Marx and Mao and religious testifying through which members went from division and a sense of individual guilt and responsibility toward a recognition of their common condition and its relation to the nature of the system in which they lived” (157).
Campbell also confronts Biesecker’s idea of techne. For her, “techne, as an art, means that the products of that art are there to be dealt with” (158).