1. Rhetoric:
The Art of Persuasion

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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.

6. 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

7. 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.

8. 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.”

9. 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

10. 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

11. Classical Argument
The Toulmin model

12. 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.

13. 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.

14. 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.

15. 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

16. 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

17. Terms Data: The evidence supporting the claim Aka: the reasons.
Was the minor premise when working with enthymemes

18. 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.

19. 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.

20. Terms Grounds: evidence used to support your data.
Backing: evidence used to support your warrant

21. 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 men.

22. 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.)

23. Flaws in a writer’s reasoning
Logical fallacies: see p

24. 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