By James B. Freeman
This monograph first provides a style of diagramming argument macrostructure, synthesizing the traditional circle and arrow process with the Toulmin version. A theoretical justification of this system via a dialectical knowing of argument, a serious exam of Toulmin on warrants, an intensive dialogue of the linked-convergent contrast, and an account of the correct reconstruction of enthymemes follows.
Read or Download Argument Structure:: Representation and Theory (Argumentation Library) PDF
Best rhetoric books
A Concise path within the artwork of Writing even if you’re composing a letter, writing a college thesis, or beginning a unique, this source bargains professional suggestion on find out how to imagine extra creatively, how one can conjure up rules from scratch, and the way to specific these rules truly and assuredly. regardless of the place you end up within the writing process—from the daunting glance of a clean web page, to the tough draft that wishes shaping, to the small yet very important questions of punctuation—you’ll locate what you wish during this one convenient, all-inclusive quantity.
This publication includes interviews with psychologist Mary box Belenky, linguist and thinker of language Noam Chomsky, French deconstructionist Jacques Derrida, foreign literacy student Paulo Freire, wonderful anthropologist Clifford Geertz, thinker Richard Rorty, and cultural critic Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak (all of whose paintings has inspired the self-discipline of rhetoric and composition) by means of essay responses from amazing students in rhetoric and composition.
Beer and Hariman offer a coherent set of essays that hint and problem the culture of realism which has ruled the contemplating lecturers and practitioners alike. those well timed essays set out a scientific research of the main realist writers of the Post-War period, the foundational recommendations of overseas politics, and consultant case stories of political discourse.
To be had capacity bargains seventy ladies rhetoricians—from historic Greece to the twenty-first century—a room in their personal for the 1st time. Editors pleasure Ritchie and Kate Ronald keep on the feminist culture of getting better a formerly unarticulated canon of women’s rhetoric.
- The student's guide to preparing dissertations and theses
- Rethinking basic writing: exploring identity, politics, and community in interaction
- Storytelling in the Digital Age
- ΦΙΛΩΝ ῬΗΤΩΡ (Philôn Rhêtôr). A Study of Rhetoric and Exegesis
- Composition in the Twenty-First Century: Crisis and Change
Extra info for Argument Structure:: Representation and Theory (Argumentation Library)
But, as Rescher points out, in formal disputation this move is a countermove to the warrant of the argument. It is thus a countermove to the inferential step from premises to conclusion, not a countermove against the conclusion. That rebutting and undercutting defeaters may be appropriately represented simply as defeaters, using one defeater box, may be further supported by considering how an argument may be extended to counter these countermoves to the warrant of the argument. How might our proponent extend his argument to answer the question of how he can be sure in light of R, specifically to counter the rebutting defeater R, and how would such an argument involve structural considerations beyond those we have already introduced?
How then should we diagram this argument? As we shall see shortly, Toulmin’s model provides what we need. In Thinking Logically (1988), we advocate incorporating elements of the Toulmin model into the standard approach. Toulmin has a radically different conception of argument structure. Just what this is and how it raises questions for the standard approach and indeed for the whole issue of recognizing the structure of arguments, we turn to next. 3 Toulmin’s Layout of Arguments In The Uses of Argument (1958), Stephen Toulmin proposes a radically different approach to displaying argument structure.
Although Toulmin is not always clear on this point, a warrant is an inference rule. Although arguments (as products) may instance inference rules, in which case the warrant licenses a step from one or more premises to a conclusion, the warrant is not a premise or any other element explicitly in the argument. This point is obvious with deductive warrants. Consider If demand for goods in general increases, then prices for goods in general will rise. Demand for goods in general is increasing. Therefore, prices for goods in general will rise, a clear cut case of Modus ponens: From To infer If p then q p q But it would be clearly wrongheaded to ask which of the statements in the argument as product present the data and which is the warrant.
Argument Structure:: Representation and Theory (Argumentation Library) by James B. Freeman