Popular Culture Review Vol. 11, No. 1, February 2000 | Page 151

Synthesizing Eastern and Western Religious Traditions In a period of heightened religiously-oriented “culture wars” within and between countries and regions, the study of how words, arguments, and narratives function to synthesize, ameliorate, and reconcile religious differences seems particularly relevant. In this article, we first describe the cultural/intellectual environment that encourages the synthetic impulse in Eastern and Western traditions. Then, using two case studies, we examine the ways contemporary East/West syntheses are crafted and communicated, with special emphasis on the concepts of rhetorical synthesis, rhetorical bridge, and syllogistic progression. Chapel (1996) described rhetorical synthesis as “The process of unifying into a coherent whole ideas (arguments, policies, themes, narratives and visions) that first appear disparate or contradictory. Further, he says, “rhetorical synthesis tends to be situated in public controversy and functions to resolve or ameliorate divisiveness, often providing a third alternative to conflicting points of view” (p. 354). Our rationale for studying rhetorical synthesis is that in an “increasingly interdependent world fraught by divisiveness and dialectical tensions, the study of synthesizing rhetoric seems a particularly relevant endeavor.” A critical examination of the synthetic impulse in public discourse should provide insights into how words, arguments and narratives work to divide and unite individuals, groups, and cultures in our present age. Chapel stresses the importance of a rhetorical bridge as “an encompassing conception that serves as an organizing principle pulling the synthesis together and making it a coherent whole.” Without this organizing principle, there is no synthesis, merely a commingling of disparate ideas, or the assertion of synthesis. Put another way, the rhetorical bridge is the central rationale making the synthesis viable, justifiable, and understandable. Chapel (1996) suggests four reasons why rhetorical synthesis is intrinsically appealing: First, in a general sense, synthesis is persuasive because it offers a positive, consistent, and coherent vision that fosters conciliation and reduces psychological and sociological stress in individuals and groups. By seeking to resolve dissonance and polarization it works toward a “healing” of the controversy. A second reason rhetorical synthesis is appealing is because the content and form of the synthesis (and the style of the speaker or writer) do not alienate many on either side of the original controversy. By not alienating its listeners, rhetorical synthesis prepares the way for persuasion and makes persuasion less difficult by rendering the audience less hostile.