What Alan Gross has identified in the above quote is that rhetoric, as the Ancient Greeks so considered, has a place equal with logic in the structuring of arguments. Its best succinct definition probably remains that of Campbell (Philosophy of Rhetoric, Bk.1, Ch.1, 1776): the art or talent by which discourse is adapted to its end. For social science writers wishing to think about its function in their own composition of texts, the following references may be helpful.

Ceccarelli, L.(2001) Shaping Science with Rhetoric: the cases of Dobzhansky, Schrodinger and Wilson. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

In her preface, the author claims that "this book is about interdisciplinarity", and she keeps her promise. By focussing on what rhetorical texts are for (they catalyse community), and how rhetorical language achieves its ends (by the writer making unusual linguistic choices), she is able to examine how rhetoric (by escaping jargon, and thereby jumping the linguistic and conceptual gaps between disciplines) can be used to foster two types of interdisciplinarity, which she refers to as "integrative" and "nonintegrative". The first, she states, makes common ground with other disciplines; the second enables the researcher to carry "special disciplinary interests and beliefs" into other fields. The overall message of the book appears to be that a skilled utilisation of rhetoric in one's language and thinking enables an enlargement both of one's research practice, and of the potential audience for its outcomes.

Dorries, M. (Ed.) (2002) Experimenting in Tongues: Studies in Science and Language. California: Stanford University Press.

An edited collection of reflections on the integral relationship between the use ( and uses) of language, and the process of thought and practice in scientific research.

Gross, A.(2006) Starring the Text: the place of Rhetoric in Science Studies. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Overall, Gross's book is a comprehensive review of the function of rhetoric in science, in the generation, constitution and dissemination of scientific knowledge; and of the competing views taken by scholars of its importance in these areas. Perhaps a somewhat demanding read for those not working on the rhetorical analysis of science texts, but some awareness of the issues could assist novitiate authors in making informed stylistic choices on their own scientific writing practices. To understand how critical this is for the outcomes and conclusions of science in general, one only has to consider knowledge in the biological sciences, and the way it is communicated in the twenty-first century: it is now integral with a "green" ecological rhetoric, a million miles away from the rhetoric of control and exploitation of natural organisms and resources that informed such sciences in the nineteenth century.

Harris, R.A.(Ed.) (1997) Landmark Essays on Rhetoric of Science Case Studies. New Jersey: Hermagoras Press.

The content of the book covers the employment of rhetoric in scientific policy, ethics and peer review, emphasising the extent to which the direction of science and the concerns of scientists are governed by the hidden paradigms of habitual rhetorics. It also includes a case study of Charles Darwin as the rhetorician par excellence.

Krips, H., McGuire, J., Melia, T. (1995) Science, Reason and Rhetoric. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press

The extent to which effective rhetoric helps the writer-researcher reach wider audiences is considered, as well as the degree to which the need to communicate with specific audiences shapes the nature and the findings of the research. A theoretical text which can be read as a practical resource for negotiating the diverse scholarly hurdles that the construction of an academic text is subject to.