1. Wrt 105: practices of academic writing
Dr. Rusty Bartels
Monday, October 22nd, 2018
Week 9, Day 1

2. Overview Introduce Assignment #2 Jones Overview Outline & Key Concepts
Freewrite
Wrap-up

3. Assignment #3
Please turn to the Assignment Packet (available on Blackboard and the course website)

4. Jones Classical Rhetoric The Appeals
Toulmin: Dissecting the Everyday Argument
Pragma-Dialectics: A Fancy Word for a Close Look at Argumentation

5. Classical Rhetoric
Heart of rhetorical history, theory, and traditions going back to Aristotle in Ancient Greece
3 concepts to take-away:
Civic Engagement
Deductive Reasoning
Inductive Reasoning

6. Classical Rhetoric Civic Engagement
Engage in the everyday and political deliberations of governance
Role of a citizen
Rhetoric is a skill to be learned and practice, not just inherent
Learning is never done – it is a life-long pursuit
Rhetorical education – education of argument and debate – was at the heart of ancient Greek & roman education
NB: “citizen” was limited – free, male property holders

7. Classical Rhetoric Deductive Reasoning
“starts from a premise that is a generalization about a large class of ideas people, etc. And moves to a specific conclusion about a smaller category of ideas or things” (163)
Syllogism: major premise (general belief)  minor premise (particular observation)
Premise is not neutral  reflective of your own context, environment, and bias

8. Classical Rhetoric Inductive Reasoning
“Stacking of evidence…if we experience something habitually, we reason that it will happen again” (164)
Evidence is not neutral —> evidence is used to shape your arguments, your claims

9. The Appeals
Logos
Ethos
Pathos
“using logic as proof for an argument” (167)
numerical evidence
syllogism
“calling on particular shared values, respected figures of authority, or one’s own character” (167)
Symbolic icons
“using emotionally driven images or language” (167)
ASPCA commercials
Our choice of appeal(s) is dependent on how we understand our audience, purpose, etc.
Logos, Ethos, & Pathos often pull on each other
Effective Pathos often relies on a common Ethos – a shared value system

10. Toulmin: Dissecting the Everyday Argument
“Argumentation is an attempt to justify a statement or a set of statements” (169)
Claim: the thesis, the argument
Data: the evidence being used
Warrant: how the evidence is being applied
Backing: further support for the warrant
Rebuttal: the counter-argument
Qualifiers: illuminates gaps in the counter that makes room for your claim

11. Toulmin: Dissecting the Everyday Argument

12. Pragma-Dialectics: A Fancy Word for a Close Look at Argumentation
If Classical Rhetoric is about logical choices and approaches
And this includes Logos, Ethos, Pathos
Pragma-Dialectics is about acknowledging ethical and moral considerations
Reaches for an idea of “fairness” in argument
“Fairness” requires shared rules, boundaries, expectations
Assumes a shared desire for a genuine solution
In offering up a set of “rules”, pragma-dialects acknowledges both the intentional and unintentional violation of said “rules”

13. Pragma-Dialectics: A Fancy Word for a Close Look at Argumentation
The Freedom Rule
The Burden-of-Proof Rule
The Standpoint Rule
The Relevance Rule
The Unexpressed Premise Rule
The Starting Point Rule
The Argument Scheme Rule
The Validity Rule
The Closure Rule
The Usage Rule

14. Pragma-Dialectics: A Fancy Word for a Close Look at Argumentation
THE FREEDOM RULE
The Rule: every party should be able to present their argument
Ad hominem: attacking character
Straw man: making argument/speaker seem absurd (e.g. Language choice “if you support this policy you’re a fool”)
QUESTION: do all arguments deserve to be heard?
THE BURDEN-OF-PROOF RULE
Need to back up your claims
THE STANDPOINT RULE
The response must address the initial standpoint, otherwise you’re debating different issues

15. Pragma-Dialectics: A Fancy Word for a Close Look at Argumentation
THE RELEVANCE RULE
Arguments & evidence must be related to your initial standpoint
THE STARTING POINT RULE
“Agree on the opening standpoint” (175)
Echoes the standpoint rule
THE UNEXPRESSED PREMISE RULE
“That’s NOT what I meant”
[1] “to falsely present what has been left unexpressed” (174)
redirection
[2] “to camouflage an unpopular idea and deny that it is part of your argument” (174)
this may be intentional or unintentional on the part of the speaker

16. Pragma-Dialectics: A Fancy Word for a Close Look at Argumentation
THE ARGUMENT SCHEME RULE
About strategy and how you approach your argument
“Argument by analogy”  e.g. Analogy in excess, disproportionate
THE VALIDITY RULE
Cause and effect correlation is not accurate, misapplied
Again, intentional or unintentional
THE CLOSURE RULE
Being able to admit right/wrong
THE USAGE RULE
Be clear
You may not fully understand what it is that you are trying to say. Doesn’t mean you’re wrong, or that the other person is right, but that the full understanding needs to be more fully developed b/c it can lead to violating other points (e.g. Validity)

17. Freewrite
What are 2-3 issues that are important to you? That you care about?
These can be situated at any level of society — from an experience in your dorm all the way up to something like global hunger and poverty.
Pick one of those issues:
What is your stance/position/argument?
What are some of the debates/conservations surrounding your issue?
What type of appeal (ethos, logos, pathos) is usually used?

18. Wrap-up
Today we:
Introduced a number of ways to approach argument within different rhetorical frameworks
Next time:
Reading: Belcher
How academics think/talk about argument
This is taken from a book aimed toward graduate students & faculty, but contains a really good conversation about how we define and understand argument as a contribution to discourse