World Of Ideas By Lee A. Jacobus

To critical read is to analyze the text and utilize information to question and elaborate one's own ideas. In the book, World of Ideas by author Lee A. Jacobus, explains this method of reading as, "… means reading actively: questioning the premises of the argument, speculating on the ways in which evidence is used, comparing the statements of one writer with those of another, and holding an inner dialogue with the author" (1). In short, critical reading involves five crucial steps to be able to attain all skills Jacobus mentioned. The first step, pre-reading, is needed to take a first look of the material and what the main point is. This step is important because one needs to get a first look before digging deeper in the text. Next is the step
According to the text, the term rhetoric, "is a general term used to discuss effective writing techniques" (Jacobus 29). Authors develop styles of writing that is used to persuade or take an effective approach in displaying their viewpoints. It is useful to study rhetoric, "to understand their value and to use them more effectively" (Jacobus 30). If one masters the use of rhetoric, it can help make essays more stronger and capture an author's style. In short, rhetoric can also be, "arguing primarily to persuade, and not primarily to get at the truth..." (Hacking 424). When studying a piece of material, often times there will be an argument. There are three different types of arguments that are noted in the text. First off, there is Classical arguments, which, "rely on facts and evidence as well as on logic and reasoning to convince the reader of a specific position" (Jacobus 44). For example, a written essay about gun control with research added can make it stronger in persuading the reader to agree. Next is the argument of Toulmin, which has three parts, like Classic, it is, "designed to convince someone of a specific position on a subject" (Jacobus 45). A unique part to this argument is a warrant. Warrant in this argument should be a reasoning connected to the claim. Lastly, is the Rogerian argument, which, "tries to find a common ground on the subject that most people would agree with" (Jacobus 45). This differs from the other two arguments, in a sense that it tells both sides of the topic. Going back to gun control, for example, in Rogerian terms, it would be displaying an argument of two tales, do they provide safety or harm? The Rogerian argument is most appealing because it gives room to expand on both sides to find a non-threatening common ground the reader can analyze and form their own take on