1. Argumentation-Persuasion Everyone has experience arguing- “You can’t possibly expect me to believe what you are saying.” “Look, I know what I’m talking about, and that’s that.” But- In writing or oration, it is using clear thinking and logic to convince audience of the soundness of a particular opinion, especially on controversial topics.

2. Differences between… Argument- purpose to document objectively to prove a point Persuasion- purpose to shake up readers and motivate them to act The two are usually combined because most people respond rationally and emotionally.

3. Aristotle’s Three Ways to Persuade Logos Ethos Pathos

4. What is rhetoric? Rhetoric is the art of persuasion. The goal of persuasion is to change others’ point of view or to move others to take action.

5. Rhetoric -the art of using language effectively to influence the thoughts and conduct of an audience Speaker/Author Topic/Subject Audience

6. Rhetorical strategies- Literary devices: metaphor, imagery, alliteration, etc Language devices: repetition, connotation, denotation, diction, etc See “Flowers” of Silva Rhetoricae for many more… http://humanities.byu.edu/rhetoric/Silva.htm

7. What is logos, ethos, and pathos? Logos = Logic Ethos = Ethics, Image Pathos = Emotions (Passion)

8. Logos, Ethos, Pathos Using logos, ethos, and pathos will help you to master the art of persuasion. Through language, you will be able to change the point of view of others! Through language, you will be able to motivate others to take action!

9. Logos Logos is an argument based on facts, evidence and reason. Using logos means appealing to the readers’ sense of what is logical.

10. Ethos Ethos is an argument based on character. Using ethos means the writer or speaker appeals to the audience’s sense of ethical behavior. The writer or speaker presents him or herself to the audience as credible, trustworthy, honest and ethical. “I am an ethical expert, so believe what I say.”

11. Pathos Pathos = argument based on feelings Using pathos means appealing to readers’ emotions and feelings.

12. Symbols for Logos, Ethos and Pathos Logos = Head Ethos = Hand Pathos = Heart

13. Logos

15. Ethos

19. Pathos

22. Logos Example In the following example, note how Ian Ayres uses evidence from experience (her work environment, Delta Airlines, the University of Chicago). This evidence establishes the precedent that Ayres uses to compare to the current situation that she argues should be changed.

23. Logos Example We don’t have single-sex toilets at home, and we don’t need them at the office. Then there’s also the small question of efficiency. I see my male colleagues waiting in line to use the men’s room, when the women’s toilet is unoccupied. Which is precisely why Delta Airlines doesn’t label those two bathrooms at the back of the plane as being solely for men and women. It just wouldn’t fly.

24. Logos Example The University of Chicago just got the 10 single-use restrooms on campus designated gender neutral. It’s time Yale followed suit. And this is not just an academic problem. There are tens of thousands of single-use toilets at workplaces and public spaces throughout the nation that are wrong- headedly designated for a single-sex. All these single-use toilets should stop discriminating. They should be open to all on a first-come, first-lock basis. —Ian Ayres, “Looking Out for No. 2”

25. Ethos Example In the following example, note how Nancy Mairs establishes her credibility and trustworthiness and authority to write about this subject by being honest. Mairs admits she is uncertain about her own motives and shows she understands the discomfort others’ have with this subject.

26. Ethos Example First, the matter of semantics. I am a cripple. I choose this word to name me. I choose from among several possibilities, the most common of which are “handicapped” and “disabled.” I made the choice a number of years ago, without thinking, unaware of my motives for doing so. Even now, I am not sure what those motives are, but I recognize that they are complex and not entirely flattering.

27. Ethos Examples People—crippled or not—wince at the word “cripple,” as they do not at “handicapped” or “disabled.” Perhaps I want them to wince. I want them to see me as a tough customer, one to whom the fates/gods/viruses have not been kind, but who can face the brutal truth of her existence squarely. As a cripple, I swagger. —Nancy Mairs, “On Being a Cripple”

28. Pathos Example In the following example from a speech by Winston Churchill, note the use of anaphora (repetition of a word or group of words at the beginning of items in a series). This repetition emphasizes the point and expresses passion and emotion. Moreover, the repetition affects the audience emotionally.

29. Pathos Example We shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender. —Winston Churchill, speech to the House of Commons, June 4, 1940

30. Review Logos = logic Logos is an argument based on facts, evidence and reason. Using logos means appealing to the readers’ sense of what is logical.

31. Review Ethos = Ethics / Image Ethos is an argument based on character. The writer or speaker presents him or herself to the reader as credible, trustworthy, honest and ethical.

32. Review Pathos = argument based on feelings Using pathos means appealing to readers’ emotions and feelings.

33. Pathos, Ethos, Logos

35. Rogerian Strategy Reject the “adversarial approach” Adopt a respectful, conciliatory posture Understand opposing viewpoints Begin with unbiased restatement of opposing viewpoint Acknowledge the validity of differing opinions

36. Building on the Classical Argument

37. Stephen E. Toulmin Stephen Edelston Toulmin is a philosopher and rhetorical theorist. He was born in England in 1922 and received his Bachelor’s degree at King’s College. After World War II he obtained his Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy degrees from Cambridge.

38. Claim Toulmin’s Model  Toulmin’s model provides that there are three essential aspects to rhetorical argument: Data Warrant

39. Toulmin’s Model, cont. Simply: A Claim is made. Data is provided in the form of supporting facts. The Warrant connects the Data to the Claim.

40. Claim Thesis Proposition Conclusion Main Point Macro-Argument Controlling Idea

41. Data Evidence, proof Opinions, information Reasons, explanation Examples, facts, data, grounds, statistics Personal narratives

42. Warrant Assumptions General principles Widely held values Commonly accepted beliefs Appeals to human motives Cultural values Presuppositions Unstated premises Generally accepted truths

43. For example: “I am an American.” (Claim) “I was born in New York State.” (Data) Anyone born in New York State is a legal American citizen. (Warrant) Toulmin says that the Claim and the Data cannot hold without a sufficiently strong Warrant, or, the weakest argument is the one with the weakest warrant.

44. Toulmin’s Model cont. Toulmin also identified other parts to an argument. Qualifier Rebuttal Backing

45. Toulmin’s Model cont. While the Claim, the Data and the Warrant are essential parts to an argument, the Qualifier, the Backing and the Rebuttal are not. The Qualifier states the strength of the claim. In our sample argument about American citizens, a Qualifier might be “Some Americans are not born in the United States. These are naturalized citizens.”

46. Qualifier Establishes probabilities in an argument. Allows exceptions. Words like may be, might, many, some, a few, probably, possibly.

47. Toulmin’s Model cont. The Backing provides extra strength to the Warrant, especially if the Warrant is not widely accepted or understood. The Backing defends the Warrant. The Rebuttal is an exception to the claim and considers counter-arguments much like the Classical model.

48. Backing To make warrants more acceptable to an audience, particularly if the audience does not happen to share them with the author. Additional evidence to “back up” a warrant, whenever the audience is in danger of rejecting it.

49. Rebuttal Establishes what is wrong, invalid, or unacceptable about an argument. Presents counterarguments or new arguments that represent entirely different perspectives or viewpoints on the issue.

50. Fallacies A fallacy is an error in reasoning Distort evidence Can be used intentionally or unintentionally Can weaken or strengthen argument depending on their use

51. Fallacies 1. ad hominem: Occurs when the writer personally attacks his or her opponents instead of finding fault with their argument 2. ad populum: Arguers use this tactic to appeal to the prejudices of the crowd. An appeal to patriotism/nationalism is often the case of this fallacy. 3. appeal to tradition: The arguer assumes that what has been good for the past is also good for the present and future, that tradition should be preserved.

52. Fallacies 4. either-or-reasoning: Occurs when the writer reduces the issue to only two alternatives that are polar opposites 5. post hoc, ergo propter hoc: Occurs when the writer implies that because one event follows another, the first causes the second. Chronology is not the same as causality. 6. non sequiter: a conclusion is drawn that has no logical connection to the evidence cited.

53. Fallacies 7. red herring: Occurs when a writer raises an irrelevant issue to draw attention away from the central issue

54. Fallacies 8. slippery slope: Occurs when the writer argues that taking one step will lead inevitably to a next step, one that is undesirable. 9. begging the question/ failing to accept the burden of proof: Occurs when the writer asserts a claim but provides no support for it.

55. Fallacies 10. appeals to questionable or faulty authority: when sources are not named or identified; using phrases like some sources say, studies show, experts claim, etc. 11. false analogy: wrongly implies that because two things share some characteristics, they are therefore alike in all respects.