Transcript Classical Argumentation part 2

THIS WEEK
•
•
•
•
•
Monday
• – Classical Argument Notes (you need to take notes – so
have out paper
•
and discussion/analysis of Singer essay’s on poverty
(Read 9/11: A View from the Midwest by Wednesday)
Tuesday
•
– In-class writing
Wednesday and Thursday
• – Essays and discussion on September 11
Friday
•
– In Cold Blood test
Remember you need The Scarlet Letter by next week
CLASSICAL
ARGUMENTATION
PART 2
DISPOSITIO OR
ARRANGEMENT/ORGANIZATION
DISPOSITIO
• Exordium: Introduction
•Narratio: Statement of the case under discussion
•Divisio: Outline of the points or steps to be covered in the
argument
•Confirmatio: The proof of the argument
•Confutatio: Refutation of the opponent’s arguments
•Peroratio: Conclusion
THE RULES
•Although these may seem arbitrary and
mechanical, they provide a set of simple, definite
principles to follow.
• The ancient rhetoricians allowed for adjustments,
such as eliminating the divisio or rearranging
some of the parts (putting the confutatio after the
divisio, for example.)
EXORDIUM (INTRODUCTION) [THE
LATIN WORD FOR “BEGINNING A WEB”]
A. The purpose is
preparation of the
audience.
Informs the audience of
our end or object
Disposes the audience
to be receptive to what
we say (“renders the
audience attentive,
benevolent, and docile”)
B. EXORDIUM: THERE ARE 5 TYPES OF
INTRODUCTION THAT ROUSE INTEREST.
Introduction
Inquisitive
Introduction
Paradoxical
Shows that our subject is important, curious, or interesting by asking a
provocative question and then seeking to sustain the audience’s interest by
suggesting the importance of the answer. This is highly advanced and should
only be attempted if your question is provocative and thought provoking.
Shows that although the points we are trying to establish seem improbable, they
must after all be admitted
Introduction
Corrective
Shows that our subject has been neglected, misunderstood, or misrepresented
Introduction
Preparatory
Explains an unusual mode of developing our subject, or
Forestalls some misconception of our purpose, or
Apologizes for any deficiencies
Introduction
Narrative
Rouses interest in our subject by adopting the anecdotal lead-in
C: EXORDIUM
Some subjects
may not need an
introduction to
arouse interest.
This is because
some subjects are
enough to arouse
interest by itself.
D. EXORDIUM
We may have to
establish our
credibility with the
audience in the
introduction.
By demonstrating
our qualifications to
speak (authority,
credentials)
By counteracting
prejudices either
about ourselves or
our subjects
By rousing hostility
toward our
opponent (often
better saved for the
conclusion)
E. EXORDIUM
The thesis may be stated in
the introduction, but it may
also appear in the narratio, or
in the peroration.
•
NARRATIO (STATEMENT
OF THE CASE UNDER
DISCUSSION)
A. This is an exposition, in which the audience
is told the circumstances that need to be
known about our subject.
B. It is a review of the facts of the issue, the
history behind it, or a summary of previous
ideas related to the issue.
C. Sometimes a vivid description (enageia) is
useful when a narrative treatment of the
background is credible.
D. The credibility of the speakers especially
important here.
DIVISIO (OUTLINE OR POINTS OR
STEPS TO BE COVERED IN THE
ARGUMENT)
A. This part is usually omitted.
B. It is typically used when the argument is
especially long and the audience needs
a a guide to alert it to the main points as
they occur.
CONFIRMATIO (PROOF
OF THE ARGUMENT)
The appeal to reason (logos) logic
Inductive proof: the amassing of evidence.
 The more the better, but often three good reasons/examples will do.
 When formulating or organizing an inductive argument ask:
 Is the evidence sufficient? (Is there enough of it?)
 Is the evidence representative? (Is it truly relevant?)
 Is the evidence reliable? (Is it from a qualified authority,
logic, etc.?)
Deductive proof: the syllogism and then enthymeme
 The basis is premises, statement on which all parties agree, which,
when considered logically, lead to a valid conclusion.
 Getting all parties to agree on the premise is often the focus of the
argument.
 When formulating or analyzing a deductive argument. Ask:
 Are the premises themselves valid or the result of good
inductive proof?
 Does the conclusion follow logically?
CONFIRMATIO
(CONTINUED…)
•The appeal to ethics (ethos)
• The audience must find the
speaker/writer trustworthy, admirable.
• The basis is a reliance on the audience’s
sense of justice and fair play.
• The appeal may be successful even
when our argument is weak in other
ways.
CONFIRMATIO
(CONTINUED…)
•The appeal to emotion (pathos)
• Knowledge of the audience is essential: what their
typical emotions are and how to arouse them.
• We may have to sacrifice the agreement of one
part of the audience to win over the majority.
• Misjudging the audience can be fatal to this type of
appeal.
CONFUTATIO
(REFUTATION OF THE
OPPOSING ARGUMENTS)
•An opposing side is implicit in any attempt to
persuade in the Classical tradition.
• Doubts may remain tin the minds of the audience if we
do not anticipate and refute objections to our thesis.
• Argumentative strategy includes deciding whether to
refute before we present our own case or after.
• If the audience is positively dispose to the
opposing argument, we should refute it first.
• If the opposing view is weak, we should refute it
after we have made our own strong case.
CONFUTATIO
(REFUTATION BY APPEAL
TO REASON)
•Refutation by appeal to reason
• We can demonstrate that the logic is
fallacious.
• We can prove that a contradictory position
is false.
• We can deny the truth of a premise.
• We can object to the inferences drawn from
a premise.
CONFUTATIO
REFUTATION BY APPEAL
TO ETHICS
•Our moral standing (credentials,
trustworthiness) with the audience can
draw attention from opposing views.
•This appeal may be successful even when
our argument is weak in other ways.
CONFUTATIO
REFUTATION BY APPEAL
TO EMOTION
•This appeal sometimes works when all
others FAIL: if our opponent has made a
strong case logically, we can use
emotion to sway the audience.
CONFUTATIO
REFUTATION BY APPEAL
TO WIT
•A joke, sarcasm, or irony should be used with great caution.
• We run the risk of alienating our audience.
• A truth remains a truth, even if it is ridiculed.
• Humor is wholly inappropriate in some situations.
•If we can make the audience laugh at an analogous situation, then
they may see the absurdity of the issue in question.
•Sophistication of wit may work well with some audiences
(therefore, we must know our audience).
• Self-ridicule or deprecation generally winds over the audience.
• Word play or irony can be admired, or conversely, misunderstood.
•Sarcasm succeeds best when directed at an individual rather than a
group.
•Ribald or obscene language or jokes will elicit unfavorable
reactions from the audience.
•Satire , when done well, can be persuasive.
PERORATIO (CONCLUSION) {THE
LATIN WORD FOR “FINISHING OFF
ONE’S PLEA}
•This part will likely linger in the memory of the audience.
•Aristotle suggest four things we may do in the conclusion.
• Inspire the audience with a favorable opinion of ourselves and an
unfavorable opinion of our opponents.
• We should have already established our credentials and ethics.
• The conclusion is a reminder and reiteration, but not merely a
repetition.
• Amplify the force of the points we have made in the previous sections
and extenuate the force of the points made by the opponents.
• Again, we should have established strong arguments and refutations.
• An amplification “enlarges” our argument; an extenuation “minimizes”
our opposition.
• Rouse the appropriate emotions in the audience.
• Continue the anecdote from the introduction, reminding the reader’s
over the general importance of the argument.
ASSIGNMENT FOR TODAY
Annotate Singer’s essay on Poverty as we read together:
SOAPSTone
• Explain tone shifts
Logical Appeals (ethos, pathos, and logos)
Argument
• All canons from from exordium to peroratio
• If no divisio is present, leave off
• Do not forget counter arguments
Language
• Pay attention to Points of View shifts
ANSWER THE FOLLOWING
QUESTIONS IN YOUR FAMILY
– ONE PAGE IS SUFFICIENT
1. What ethical dilemma does Singer address?
2. How does Singer make his argument? What evidence
does he use? Is it effective?
3. How does Singer appeal to the audience specifically?
4. What are the potential problems with his argument?
5. Why is the argument controversial?
6. Explain the significance of moral responsibility as Singer
sees it.