is a foundational ideograph in the American and more broadly, Western, tradition. Yet this term is not static in its meanings or commitments to social action. The current debate around cancel culture is the site of renegotiation of in relation to other terms such as , , , , , and . This study is an ideographic analysis of two artifacts that represent two sides of the discussion: "A Letter on Justice and Open Debate"and "A More Specific Letter on Justice and Open Debate."Following McGee's theory and method, this research examines the diachronic definition of through the U. S. Supreme Court and the liberty model and the synchronic tensions surrounding represented in these two editorials. The analysis identifies as an inadequate and detrimental synecdoche in the renegotiation and suggests that there is no appropriate synecdoche because is prerequisite to all public debate. This renegotiation is happening now because of disparities between the ideal of and its material reality in society. Further, because has not been sufficiently defined and its alternatives explained and rebutted, it is being devalued in current society. Finally, the prevalence of the internet as a public square raises questions about protected speech as have all new media in the past. The study shows that one vision must eventually dominate because they are fundamentally irreconcilable within a single political union. The analysis concludes with an outline of the two moral visions presented in each letter and the consequences of adopting each.
College and Department
Fine Arts and Communications
BYU ScholarsArchive Citation
Spackman, Emily Ann, " and : An Ideographic Analysis of " (2021). Theses and Dissertations. 9032.
ideographic analysis, synecdoche, irreconcilability, Harper's letter, cancel culture