Noting that discussions about the interaction of science and politics are often heard, this paper addresses how these discursive arenas are defined and distinguished. It argues that political and scientific discourse may be distinguished by the roles they assume on the rhetorical stage, and the relevant roles which emerge are implementers and investigators. The paper first defines and elaborates on these roles, then states that rhetoric of inquiry first emerges when discourse is appropriated by different audiences or is placed in a different genre--for example, the appropriation by different audiences might occur when a debate within a scientific community becomes a topic for discussion beyond the context of academic journals or laboratory experiments. The paper states that another situation that calls attention to rhetoric of inquiry involves the shift and possible conflict among different standards for testing and certifying truth claims--the idea of reality held by a community may be understood by examining how it establishes and tests what it considers true. The paper cites three conditions for conflict between implementers and investigators: perceived antitheses between political and intellectual endeavors; epistemological division between pure and applied knowledge; and the separation of power from knowledge. The major part of the paper examines the philosophical basis of these conditions in relation to scenarios in which they become actualized, citing scientific method in intellectual history and focusing on Nazi political discourse regarding racial science. Based on the ideas of Habermas and Foucault, the paper concludes that investigation and implementation interact dynamically. (Includes 60 notes.) (NKA)