Rhetoric and logic and argumentation
- 1. Rhetoric, Logic, and Argumentation
- 2. What is Rhetoric? -the art that humans use to process all the messages we send and receive Rhetorical Choices • -what a writer uses to get the meaning across We focus on two things I. Analyzing all the language choices that are used to establish the text's meaning, purpose, and effectiveness II. Examining the features of the text that establish rhetoric.
- 3. How to be skilled at Rhetoric a. excellent writing skills b. read critically c. able to examine a situation and determine what has already been said , what remains unresolved, and what you can say to continue the conversation or persuade readers to take action.
- 4. The Rhetorical Triangle The 3 rhetorical appeals
- 5. Appeal to Ethos: moral character • In an appeal to ethos the speaker (rhetor) emphasizes the strength of their own moral character and experience in order to establish personal credibility.
- 6. The Rhetor • The rhetor creates a persona-a mask-the character that the audience perceives behind the text • is based in part on who the rhetor presumes the audience to be and in part on what he or she • knows and believes about the subject of the text: what evidence or proof are the most • compelling and persuasive? • Members of the audience, hold some beliefs, based on their background knowledge and experiences, • about the rhetor and the subject and they tap into these beliefs as they listen. Also, the audience, • uses their ability to reason-and they are persuaded by the strength of the evidence presented.
- 7. Appeal to Pathos: emotion • An appeal to pathos attempts to elicit an emotional response from the audience.
- 8. Appeal to Logos: reason, logic, words. • An appeal to logos relies on the use of rational analysis and persuasive language.
- 9. QUIZ: logos, pathos, rhetoric, audience, ethos, message, speaker • 1. Related to the audience’s feelings • 2. “The art of ruling the minds of men.” • 3. Emphaiszes reason and proof. • 4. The individual (s) on the receiving end of the communication. • 5. The individual presenting the argument in speech, writing, or another medium. • 6. The ideas being communicated. • 7. Emphasizes the speaker’s/rhetor’s character
- 10. Cognitive Bias • Express a hardwired preference for certain flawed patterns • Because you think means you already have bias ▫ -your audience is already biased • Don’t believe everything you think ▫ Generally see the world as better ▫ See others as worse ▫ See patterns where there are none ▫ Wired to block out people who oppose us
- 11. Gambler’s Fallacy, Confirmation Bias, Illusory Superiority, bandwagon Effect, Halo Effect, Wishful Thinking, Framing Bias, Clustering Illusion, Self-Serving Bias • 1. I’ve found at least 30 articles that confirm my idea that some people have extrasensory perception. I’ve also seen reports that disagree, but I have not read any of them. • 2. I don’t think anyone actually has ESP; everyone I know says that the whole consent is a myth. • 3. I think some people do have psychic abilities; I would love to think that it’s possible to predict the future. • 4. Some people can foresee the future, but I don’t think that people can have psychic abilities. • 5. I’ve notices that every time I think about my best friend, Jessica, she calls me. That’s why I think Jessica has ESP. • 6. When I called the psychic
- 12. Deductive vs Inductive Arguments • Deductive ▫ 1. propose a set of principles ▫ 2. form a conclusion by making a logical inference from these principles ▫ 3. the conclusion is a logical consequence of the premises ▫ 1. All teachers assign homework. ▫ 2. Mrs. Martin is a teacher. ▫ 3. Therefore, Mrs. Martin assigns homework.
- 13. Syllogism-a deductive argument composed of two premises (major and minor) and a conclusion • Major Premise: 1. All men are mortal. • Minor Premise: 2. Socrates is a man. • Conclusion: 3. Therefore, Socrates is a mortal.
- 14. • Inductive-do not prove that a certain conclusion must be true. They prove that the conclusion is PROBABLY true. • 1. All the students I know hate homework. • 2. Cynthia is a student. • 3. Therefore, Cynthia probably hates homework.
- 15. Deductive Inductive • 1. All feathered animals are birds. • 2. Chicken Little has feathers. • 3. Therefore, Chicken Little is a bird. • Chicken Little is a bird. • Most birds eat insects. • Therefore, Chicken Little probably eats insects.
- 16. Valid-structure is correct Sound-the statements must be true and the structure must be correct • 1. All bananas are purple. • 2. Socrates is a banana. • 3. Therefore, Socrates is purple. • 1. There are 12 inches in a foot. • 2. There are 3 feet in a yard. • 3. Therefore, there are 36 inches in a yard.
- 17. Logical Fallacies • Fallacy means error • Logical fallacy is a mistake in reasoning
- 18. Non Sequitur • It does not follow • 1. All aardvarks are mammals. • 2. All mammals are animals. • 3. Therefore, all animals are aardvarks.
- 19. Non Causa Pro Causa “non cause for cause” • The fallacy of mistaken causation. • These arguments mistake mere coincidence or correlation for causation. • My grandmother lived to the age of 98. • My grandmother ate chocolate every day. • My grandmother lived to the age of 98 because she ate chocolate every day.
- 20. Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter hoc “With this, therefore because of this” • The speaker assumes there is a causal relationship between two factors simply because they occur at the same time • Scientists confirm link between ADD and cell phones ▫ Studies have shown that since the use of cell phones has become more widespread worldwide, diagnoses of ADD have increases dramatically. These findings seem to suggest that the radiation emitted by cell phones may cause ADD in some users.
- 21. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc “after this, therefore because of this” • The speaker attempts to argue that one thing has caused another using only the chronological sequence of evens as evidence . • The event that happens first is assumed to have caused the events that follows. ▫ The Society for a Bread-Free Nation claims that more than 90 percent of violent crimes are committed within 24 hours after the perpetrator has eaten bread. These findings seem to suggest that consuming bread inspires violent behavior.
- 22. Hasty Generalizations • The speaker makes a weak analogy between the part and the whole, but the part does not truly exemplify the whole. • Chester is a cat. • Chester has no tail. • Therefore, cats have no tails.
- 23. Stereo-Types • They are all the same to me! • Is a widely accepted, simplistic view of a people who belong to a given group. • All politicians I have known lie. • All politicians are exactly like the politicians I know. • Therefore, all politicians are liars.
- 24. Loaded Questions • It is a fallacy of interrogation • This type of fallacy occurs in the form of a question • They are loaded with assumptions. • When was the last time you did drugs? • Have you stopped beating your wife? • Why do gun owners like violence?
- 25. Red Herring • Arguments that divert attention from the true issues of a debate by emphasizing irrelevant information.
- 26. Argument from Authority • Four out of five experts recommend it. • The US Surgeon General uses a PC. • Therefore, PCs are better than Macs.
- 27. Ad Hominem • Meant to divert attention from the legitimate issues of the debate. • Argument “against the man” • The speaker suggests that an opponent's argument should be rejected on the basis of some quality of the speaker that is not logically related to the credibility of his or her argument. • A. my research demonstrates that using pesticides in the home increases the risk of cancer. • B. Have you had cancer? • A. No. • B. Then you’re in no position to know whether pesticides cause cancer.
- 28. Guilt by Association • The speaker attempts to malign an opponent by associating him or her with a negative concept. • The fallacy is based on the false notion that if an individual can be linked in any way to something offensive, it is fair to equate
- 29. Straw Man • These arguments are a diversionary tactic • The speaker avoids addressing an opponent’s argument directly by creating and attacking a “dummy” argument that does not accurately represent the opponent’s stance. • Whenever a speaker describes an opponent’s argument in a dishonest way, instead choosing to represent a distorted, extremist, or simply absurd version of the argument. • The Senator from Vermont has suggested that we dismantle our North Atlantic Radar System, now that the Soviet union is no long a threat. I don’t understand why he would want the United States to be defenseless.
- 30. Emotional Appeal • Speaker attempts to persuade an audience through emotional manipulation. • You should eat everything on your plate because there are starving children in Africa. • If you don’t donate your kidney, you are murdering someone.