1. 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

2. CLASSICAL ARGUMENTATION PART 2 DISPOSITIO OR ARRANGEMENT/ORGANIZATION

3. 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

4. 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.)

5. 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”)

6. B. EXORDIUM: THERE ARE 5 TYPES OF INTRODUCTION THAT ROUSE INTEREST. Introduction Inquisitive 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. Introduction Paradoxical 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

7. C: EXORDIUM Some subjects may not need an introduction to arouse interest. This is because some subjects are enough to arouse interest by itself.

8. 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)

9. E. EXORDIUM The thesis may be stated in the introduction, but it may also appear in the narratio, or in the peroration.

10. 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.

11. 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.

12. 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?

13. 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.

14. 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.

15. 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.

16. 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.

17. 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.

18. 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.

19. 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.

20. 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.

21. 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

22. 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.