An Intro To Argument Week 1 Discussion 1

English 122: Composition II An Intro to Argument Argument and Rhetoric
An argument's a method for communicating a singular position w/evidence, logic, & persuasion. There are essential elements to all valid arguments, though they may take different forms.
1. Claim 3. Counterargument
2. Evidence 4. Rebuttal

A successful argument depends upon the balance between these elements. The claim is the basis of the argument. A big opposing viewpoint, called the counterargument, is constantly pushing down on one side or the other. Balance can only be achieved by providing enough evidence to support the claim along w/rebuttal of the counterargument. Essentially, an argument depends on research (evidence) & finding flaws in opposing viewpoints (rebuttal). Each claim made needs this support to be valid.

When you begin to write, you must analyze the rhetorical situation. This means identifying the writer (Ethos), Audience (Pathos), & Topic (Logos). These items form a triangle that will frame your project.

When writing academic papers, try to set your other interests & behaviors aside & write as a scholar. This will make you a credible writer. Ethos is very important when presenting an argument. To persuade readers to agree with you, writing must be credible. How can you appeal to your audience? You must find a way to reach your audience & impress them w/your ability to use shared values & culture to persuade the reader. Aristotle used the term pathos to describe the humanistic appeal to emotion & values of your audience.

A research-based paper will rely upon logos, Aristotle's term for an appeal to reason & logic. An argument will also require attention to reason & logic to be credible. A formula for logos in an argument is claim + evidence = credible argument. All factors should be analyzed in a logical manner to add credibility to an academic argument. 2 common types of arguments are Classic & Rogerian. How do the 4 elements of an argument fit into these 2 styles? How do the 3 points of the rhetorical triangle fit into each style?

Classic (Aristotlelian) Argument – rooted in Greek philosophy & rhetoric. Aristotle believed that every valid argument contained a syllogism. It's a statement w/evidence to support it. The key to understanding how a syllogism works is the ability to evaluate or generate proper evidence. In the classical form, this evidence should work to convince an audience of author's contentions in a fashion that not only supports their major claim, but rebuts all alternative arguments in a way that's both logical & decorous. The structure below is a basic outline of how a classic argument's constructed. The sections don't represent paragraphs; they represent distinct segments of an argumentative essay &, with the exception of the intro & thesis statement, the body can be situated in any fashion that's most effective at convincing a given audience.

Section One: Intro & Thesis – Your intro should describe the rhetorical situation & give a clear forecast of the material you'll cover in your essay. Your thesis statement should make a clear, limited, descriptive assertion & explain why your stance matters.

Section 2: Present the position you most agree with. Then, give ample evidence to support why you hold this view. (Don't use 1st-person. Use 3rd-person narrative).

Section 3: Present the position you most disagree with. Then, validate the perspective w/a circumstance or situation in which that viewpoint could or might be correct.

Section 4: While remaining non-offensive in language & style, provide a rebuttal of the opposition's stance by pointing out its fallacies or lack of logos & ethos.

Section 5: Conclusion – Provide a sound but brief explanation of your argument & further direction for your reader.

Consensual (Rogerian) Argument – based on the notion that many contentious issues, subjects, problems, etc. can be solved by identifying the “common ground” of all parties involved & working together toward a common goal. Common ground is the shared values, concerns, & constraints of each party. There are no clear winners/losers in this type of argument style. The key is that both (or various) parties profit in some defined fashion while making concessions or changes that benefit the traditionally labeled opposition. The structure below is a basic outline of how a consensual (common ground) argument's constructed.

Section 1: Intro & Thesis – Intro should describe the rhetorical situation & give the audience a clear forecast of the material you'll cover in your essay. Thesis should make a clear, limited, descriptive assertion & explain why your stance matters. However, you need to remember to argue for a solution that's acceptable to both perspectives. Your thesis should clearly state a type of compromise. You should then be able to expand on that compromise in Section 3.

Section 2: Present the perspective you disagree w/most. Make sure you do so w/fair language, & fully develop the perspective from the constraints in which the stance might be most valid – i.e. no one's wrong all the time. In what circumstance might this perspective be the most correct to select?

Section 3: Present the most valid perspective using logic, credibility, & evidence. Your research should guide you in the creation of this section.

Section 4: Create a common ground/a Rogerian solution. This section should convince your audience that the opposing perspective will benefit from your stance. The key isn't to point out why the opposing perspective's faulty, but to explain why your perspective serves the greater good or is more logical in the given constraints & how it benefits the opposing perspective.

Conclusion: Provide a wrap up & continuation of your Rogerian solution. It should also include direction for your audience (i.e., no subject can be completely solved). Therefore, you should work toward plausible solutions rather than absolute remedies.