Transcript here

Rhetoric:
The Art of Persuasion
What is an argument?
NOT a quarrel
Intended to draw people together to solve a
problem
To clarify thought, not obscure it
An effort to find truth
Why learn to write arguments?
To be able to engage with others, through
language, to solve problems and negotiate
differences satisfactorily.
To succeed as a writer in college
To do well on the AP exam and receive
college credit
What is truth?
After completing the brainstorm, you see
that “truth” is dependent upon perception.
“seeking the truth” does not mean “finding
the right answer” but rather thinking
through a complex issue to gain further
understanding
Psuedo-Argument
Rational arguments require 3 things
An issue question with alternative answers
Reasonable participants who operate within the
conventions of reasonable behavior
Potentially sharable assumptions that can serve
as a starting place or foundation for the
argument.
Psuedo-Argument
Fanatical believers: they are right because
they say so!
Might site The Bible or The Communist
Manifesto as proof
Narrow reading and understanding of this text
Undeniable faith in the author
These underlie their arguments and all might
not share these views
Psuedo-Argument
Fanatical skeptic: There is no real proof for
anything
There is no proof that the sun will rise
tomorrow (even though it has every day in
recorded history)
Genuine argument is impossible with these
types of participants.
Psuedo-Arguments
Lack of shared assumptions
Smoking should be banned b/c it causes cancer
Assumed premise: cancer is bad b/c death is
bad
“So. What’s so bad about cancer?”
“Suffering and death are just a part of human
nature.”
“We will all suffer and die.”
Rational or psuedo?
Decide which questions will lead to
reasonable arguments
Is Spike Lee a good film
director?
Is postmodern architecture
beautiful?
Should cities subsidize
professional sports
venues?
Is Justin Timberlake better
looking than Demi
Moore’s man?
What makes a good film
director? Pseudo
What makes something
beautiful? Pseudo
Rational: everyone pays
taxes. How should that
money be spent?
Again, beauty. pseudo
If audience doesn’t agree with my premise,
does it make my argument faulty?
No. You may have to prove/support/defend your
warrant/premise in your argument before
defending your claim.
Don’t expect to change any minds if you don’t
share at least one belief/value.
Won’t be effective or rational if no shared values.
No real negotiation, domination or inquiry will
occur with your audience.
It is possible to resist a belief and still agree with
the conclusion. See p. 35 Informed Argument
Classical Argument
The Toulmin model
The alternative to rigid logic
Syllogisms require each piece to be true
Toulmin saw a need for a “working logic”
These are used to show things that are
“probably” true
The structure is similar, however.
The model
An audience-based courtroom model
Different from formal logic (syllogisms) in
that it assumes:
All assertions and assumptions are contestable
by “opposing counsel”
All final verdicts about the persuasiveness of
arguments will be rendered by a neutral third
party, judge or jury.
How it helps you as a writer
Gives usable language for talking about
parts of an argument
Helps anticipate audience reaction/needs
Uses enthymemes as core of the argument
and other parts as support for that core.
Terms
Warrant: the value the audience has to hold
if the soundness of the argument is to be
guaranteed or warranted.
Was the implied assumption or major premise
in our work with the enthymemes
Terms
Claim: writer’s statement of belief
Was the conclusion when we were working
with enthymemes
Is the point the writer is wishing to prove
Terms
Data: The evidence supporting the claim
Aka: the reasons.
Was the minor premise when working with
enthymemes
Example
Major Premise:
Minor Premise:
Conclusion:
Warrant:
Data:
Claim:
A dark sky indicates rain
The sky is getting darker
Therefore, I it will
probably rain, so I should
shut the window.
A dark sky indicates rain.
The sky is getting darker
Therefore, I it will
probably rain, so I should
shut the window.
Example
Major Premise:
Minor Premise:
Conclusion:
Warrant:
Data:
Claim:
Gender stereotypes should be
eliminated
The image of women in combat
would help eliminate gender
stereotypes
Women should be allowed to
join combat units.
Gender stereotypes should be
eliminated
The image of women in combat
would help eliminate gender
stereotypes
Women should be allowed to
join combat units.
Terms
Grounds: evidence used to support your
data.
Backing: evidence used to support your
warrant
Example
Claim:
Data/reason:
grounds:
Women should be allowed to
join combat units.
The image of women in combat
would help eliminate gender
stereotypes
Data and evidence
showing that a chief
stereotype of women is
that they are soft and
nurturing whereas men are
stereotyped as tough and
aggressive. The image of
women in combat gear
would shock people into
seeing women as equal to
Example
Warrant:
Backing:
Gender stereotypes are
harmful and should be
eliminated.
Arguments showing how
the existing stereotype of
soft and nurturing women
and tough, aggressive men
is harmful to both men
and women(examples of
how the stereotypes keeps
both sexes stifled,
examples of other benefits
that come from this
elimination, etc.)
Flaws in a writer’s reasoning
Logical fallacies: see p. 35-41
Evidence in Argument
Your grounds and backing will require evidence
for support
Personal experience--Memory or observation
Interviews, surveys and questionaires
Reading
Facts and examples
Summaries of research
Testimony