Elocuencia y suspicacia. La seducción de la opinión pública en torno a la Revolución francesa.
Abstract
About the decadence of the rethoric along 18th and 19th centuries, the author explores the ambiguities of the concept of public opinión with reference to the «Revolution». Actually, he tries to show how the disregard of the rethoric, so accustomed during the Oíd Régimen crisis, would have derived after 1789 in a deep distrust towards those who, by means of word, acted as spokes-men of the public opinión. The systematic appeal to sentiment and «simple eloquency» as a proof of sincerity would have succeeded neither in removing such doubts in respect to these new rethors, ñor in preventing the consequent loss of prestige of politics.Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors whose contributions are accepted for publication in this journal, accept the following terms:
a. The authors retain their copyright and guarantee to the magazine the right of first publication of their work, which will be simultaneously subject to the Creative Commons Attribution License Attribution-Noncommercial-No derivative works 4.0 Spain, which allows third parties to share the work as long as its author and its first publication is indicated.
b. Authors may adopt other non-exclusive license agreements to distribute the version of the published work (e.g. deposit in an institutional repository or archive, or published in a monographic volume) provided the initial publication in this journal is indicated.
PLAGIARISM AND SCIENTIFIC FRAUD
The publication of work that infringes on intellectual property rights is the sole responsibility of the authors, including any conflicts that may occur regarding infringement of copyright. This includes, most importantly, conflicts related to the commission of plagiarism and/or scientific fraud.
Plagiarism is understood to include:
1. Presenting the work of others as your own.
2. Adopting words or ideas from other authors without due recognition.
3. Not using quotation marks or another distinctive format to distinguish literal quotations.
4. Giving incorrect information about the true source of a citation.
5. The paraphrasing of a source without mentioning the source.
6. Excessive paraphrasing, even if the source is mentioned.
Practices constituting scientific fraud are as follows:
1. Fabrication, falsification or omission of data and plagiarism.
2. Duplicate publication.
3. Conflicts of authorship.
