Final answer:
Vatz challenges Bitzer's philosophy by arguing that the rhetorician actively constructs the rhetorical situation through speech and writing, rather than responding to pre-existing conditions. He emphasizes the rhetor's influence in deciding what is significant, as opposed to Bitzer's more situational approach to rhetoric.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question asks how Vatz challenges or complicates Bitzer's philosophy on the rhetorical situation. In addressing this question, it's essential to understand the theories proposed by Bitzer and Vatz. Lloyd Bitzer's philosophy contends that the rhetorical situation is a natural context of persons, events, objects, relations, and an exigence that invites discourse. According to Bitzer, the elements of the rhetorical situation dictate the communication produced. In contrast, Richard E. Vatz takes a different stance, suggesting that rhetoric itself creates the situation, arguing that the rhetor's choice and description create the exigency rather than discovering it. Vatz believes that the rhetorician has power in deciding what is and is not important, thus challenging Bitzer's more deterministic view.
Vatz complicates Bitzer's theory by emphasizing the rhetor's active role in constructing a reality through language, as opposed to Bitzer's notion that reality dictates rhetorical response. This debate is fundamental in understanding the rhetorical strategies writers, speakers, and other communicators might use to influence an audience, considering their awareness of the rhetorical situation. Vatz's perspective indicates a greater emphasis on the agency of the rhetor in shaping the discourse.