Rhetoric of Argument

Rhetorical Situation

Image from http://www-as.phy.ohiou.edu/~rouzie/fall151/analysis.html

Exigence

Purpose

Reasons for Argument

WinInformConvince/persuadeDecideMeditateUnderstand (invitational rhetoric)

Argument (discover a truth)=leads to beliefPersuasion (know a truth)=leads to action

What is your Argument?

Determining Your Stance on a Topic: Using Stasis Theory

Fact (Does X exist?)Definition (What is X?)Quality (What is the value of X? What are

the causes or consequences of X?)Procedure (What should we do about X?Evidence (What is the evidence for my

claims about X?)

What is the evidence for your Argument?

Considering Kinds of Evidence

FactsStatistics

Large sample sizeRepresentativeRandom sample (non-biased)

ExamplesTestimonyEvidence must be accurate,

representative, sufficient

Using Lines of Argument

Ethos—arguments based on characterGood will, good sense, and good characterCommon sense, credibility

Pathos—arguments based on:ValuesArgument from the heart

Logos—arguments based on facts and reasonArtistic inartistic

Logical Analysis

Inductive ArgumentsUsing observations to draw a specific

conclusionDeductive Arguments

Applying a generalized belief to specific caseToulmin’s model

Alternative to induction and deduction

Enumerative induction

“Every crow I have seen is black. Therefore all crows are black.”

What’s good about this argument?

What problems could there be with it?

Enumerative Argument concerns

Greater sample size yields greater probability.

More representative sample yields higher probabilities.

One definite counterexample shoots down an enumerative induction.

Argument by analogy

“The tissues of the eye are very similar to the tissues of the digestive system. Would you want to pour whiskey in your eye?”

Advantages? Problems?

Problem: Only relevant resemblances count in drawing correct analogies.

Deductive Reasoning: Syllogisms

Major premiseGeneralized belief assumed to be trueAll men are mortal

Minor premiseApplied to a specific caseSocrates was a man

ConclusionSocrates was mortal

Advantages? Problems?

Enthymeme

Syllogism with at least one premise left unstated.

Example

We cannot trust this man, for he has perjured himself in the past.

In this enthymeme, the major premise of the complete syllogism is missing:

Those who perjure themselves cannot be trusted. (Major premise - omitted)

This man has perjured himself in the past. (Minor premise - stated)

This man is not to be trusted. (Conclusion - stated) Example from http://rhetoric.byu.edu/Figures/E/enthymeme.htm

Deductive reasoning: more examples Peasant 1: A witch! We have found a witch! Can we burn her? Belvedere: How do you know that she is a witch? Peasant 2: Because she looks like one! Witch: I am not a witch! I am not a witch! They dressed me up like this, and this is not my nose it is

a false one! [Belvedere pulls off the false nose and opens his helmet] Peasant 1: Well, we did do the nose, and the hat. . . . Belvedere: There are ways of telling whether she is a witch. Tell me, what do you do with witches? Peasants: Burn them! Belvedere: Now, what do burn besides witches? Peasant 3: More witches! [receives a punch from Peasant 1; silence] Peasant 2: Wood? Belvedere: So, why do witches burn? [more silence] Peasant 2: Because there made of wood? Belvedere: So, how do you tell if she is made of wood? Peasant 3: Build a bridge out of her! Belvedere: Ah, but cant you also build bridges out of stone? Peasant 3: Oh, right. Belvedere: Tell me, does wood sink? Peasant 1: No, it floats. Belvedere: What also floats in water? [lots of yelling and many wrong and random answers including very small rocks] King Arthur: A duck! Belvedere: Exactly! Peasant 2: So if she weighs as much as a duck she is made of wood. Belvedere: And therefore? Peasants: A witch!

A Witch?

She looks like oneMajor premise: Witches look a certain wayMinor premise: She looks a certain wayConclusion: She is a witch

She is made of woodMajor premise: Things made of wood burnMinor premise: Witches burnConclusion: Witches are made of wood

Toulmin’s model

Claim (controversial statement) That tutor is probably intelligent.

Data (evidence that supports the claim) She is a Writing Fellow.

Warrant (underlying assumption linking the claim and data. All Writing Fellows are intelligent.

http://owlet.letu.edu/contenthtml/research/toulmin.html

Who is Your Audience?

Consider Audience

Who are my readers?What do they believe? What common ground do they share?What do I want my readers to believe?What do they need to know?Why should they care?

From Barnet and Bedau, “Developing an Argument of Your Own.” From Critical Thinking to Argument, p. 123.

How will you present your Argument?

Classical Arrangement (for undecided audience)

IntroductionState problemGet readers’ attentionOutline structure

Narration/BackgroundDefinitionsHistory of situation

PropositionClaimBasic reasons for belief

Proof or ConfirmationEvidence

RefutationDisprove

counterargumentsConcession

Concede any good points of opposition

Conclusion

Rogerian Arrangement(for opposing audience)

IntroductionConcessionsThesisSupportConclusion

Sources

Travis T. Anderson, A Primer to Critical Reading and Writing. Philosophy 105 Student Manual. Brigham Young University, 1995

Sylvan Barnet and Hugo Bedau. From Critical Thinking to Argument: A Portable Guide. Boston: Bedfords/St. Martin’s, 2005.

Cheryl Glenn and Loretta Gray. The Writer’s Harbrace Handbook. 3rd edition. Boston: Thompson/Wadsworth, 2007.

Howard Kahane and Nancy Cavender. Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life. 8th edition. New York: Wadsworth Publishing, 1998.