Examing a Significant Public Argument Assignment | Online Assignment

Use multiple texts to examine a significant public argument. Identify the range of important concerns, assumptions, appeals, and evidence, evaluating the relative persuasiveness of these texts and drawing connections among them.”
USE 4 or more authors 
(Slaughter, Hardin, Hirshman, Dorment, Kington, and Frankel.)

I attached the instructions and rhetorical strategies given to me by my professor

Prompt

“Use multiple texts to examine a significant public argument. Identify the range of important concerns, assumptions, appeals, and evidence, evaluating the relative persuasiveness of these texts and drawing connections among them.”

 

For Project 4: USE 4 or more authors
(Slaughter, Hardin, Hirshman, Dorment, Kington, and Frankel.) 

 

Use a minimum of 4 authors to:

• Identify concerns, appeals, evidence, assumptions:
• Connect authors:  ________________________
• Evaluate “relative persuasiveness”: ______________________

 

Consider your Rhetorical Situation: 

• YOUR AUDIENCE: academic readers, thus your tone is formal.
• YOUR PURPOSE: ___________________.
• MLA style in-text citations. NO works cited page please.
• LENGTH: 1400-1700 WORDS

 

Introduction:

• Keep it simple. Remember you are analyzing a group of texts who are debating gender and success.
• Note several concerns within the general debate.
• You do not have to discuss all concerns. Try to pick the most interesting.
• Note that you will connect and examine the various points of view.

 

Example introduction: 

In recent discussions of gender and success, many concerns have been  argued. Authors have argued around such issues as ________, ________, ________, _________, and work-life balance. Some, like Anne Marie Slaughter, argue that until “society” and the “economy” change women cannot balance work and private life. From her perspective, the present social and economic systems do not support having a full-time career and being a full-time mother. However, Sheryl Sandberg argues…

My paper will analyze and evaluate types of evidence, assumptions, appeals, and finally the relative persuasiveness of these texts.

Body: 

    Organize sections by concerns. You might use headings for sections based on key issues/ concerns.  In each section, try to MIX 2 or more authors’ views on the concern. Examine types of evidence, appeals, and assumptions. You might want to note how authors complicate, complement, extend, or qualify one another. Analyze how persuasive authors are–for their given audiences and in reference to each other.

 

Topic Sentences: 

• One key issue/concern in this conversation is … …, and several writers have noted their position on this. X, for example, argues … … … … …, while Y has emphasized … … … … ….
• In addition to ____________, many writers have discussed _____________. In his 2002 essay, Z argues that _____________ Q, taking a feminist view, extends Z’s point, insisting that ____________.   She states, for example, that America must … … … … … …
• On the issue of […], X’s position is close to Y’s. However, in Y’s view X’s position that … … … … is too simple.  Many other things complicate X’s position. For example, Y might point out that X relies too heavily on … … … …

 

Analyzing on evidence, assumptions, appeals:

• X’s main evidence is anecdotes. (or data, or personal information, or authoritative sources, etc.)
• Clearly, X relies heavily on logos, although we do see her use of
• Y seems to believe that her readers share her belief that…
• X here assumes his readers also believe in [x, y, z].
• Y’s view that __________ complicates X’s view on this concern.

 

Summations: End most sections of your paper by clearly wrapping up your point.

• In sum, we see that X employs a careful mix of personal evidence and of logos and pathos
• In my view, between X and Y, Y is the more persuasive because…
• Y’s careful use of anecedotes would effectively reach her female readers because these readers probably share Y’s assumptions and experience. However, her [male, older, younger, well-educated, etc.]  readers might not share Y’s assumptions that ……

Also: See They Say I Say, chapters 2 and 3 for the many ways of entering the debate.

 

Conclusion:

Wrap up your paper, reminding readers of the key ways the writers connect and note which you feel are the most persuasive. Does your paper suggest anything the reader might want to remember for future debates? What should readers keep in mind, finally, about gender and work? Does looking at concerns help readers? Why? How?

Rhetorical Strategies

 

Rhetorical strategy – a particular way in which writers craft language so as to have an effect on readers.  Strategies are means of persuasion, ways of using language to get readers’ attention and agreement.

 

Some Common Rhetorical Strategies
Metadiscourse, definitions, tropes, key terms and categories, framing devices, appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos, rebuttals, qualifications, etc.

When Discussing Rhetorical Strategies, Remember to:

1. Identify rhetorical strategies
2. Describe how they work
3. Describe why they are used – what purpose do they accomplish?

 

When describing why a strategy is used, you may want to consider alternative strategies, and think about how they would work differently. You may also want to consider what would happen if the strategy were left out – what difference would it make to the argument? This may help you figure out why the particular strategy was chosen.

 

Rhetorical Strategies as Frameworks

Rhetorical strategies can be identified in the ways authors create frames, choose categories and metaphors, and construct definitions.

Frames are typically constructed through the use of metaphors, definitions, narratives, categories and metalinguistic commentary. They are used to get an audience to attend to certain elements of a situation and ignore others; to construct a particular way of seeing an issue, event, person or group, and to shape the way an audience understands the context of communication.  They can have persuasive effects.

 

For example:

 

Headings – consider the following newspaper headlines concerning the supreme court’s overruling of California’s medical marijuana medical laws:

1. Salon Magazine “Court rules against pot for sick people”

2. New York Times: “High Court Allows Prosecution of Medical Marijuana Users”
3. USA Today: “MEDICAL MARIJUANA BAN UPHELD”
4. San Diego Union Tribune: “Court OKs marijuana crackdown”
5. L.A. Times: “Justices Give Feds Last Word on Medical Marijuana”
   5. Christian Science Monitor: “US Court rules against pot for sick people”
6. Christian News Source: “Medical Marijuana Laws Don’t Shield Users From Prosecution”

   Examples from Frank Luntz (top lobbyist, pollster, architect of the contract with America)
   1. Global Warming vs. Climate Change
   2. Contract with America vs Policy/Platform
   Death Tax/Estate Tax
   2. Don’t talk about deregulation or rollback, talk about “streamlining unnecessary, burdensome red tape” or “common sense legislation.” Don’t focus on process, focus on benefits; don’t focus on past or present, focus on future. Don’t talk about economics, talk about protection.

 

How each heading or topic is framed will have an immediate effect on the audience.

 

Analyzing Rhetorical Strategies

 

Rhetorical strategies can be found in just about anything we consider a “text,” including literature, advertisements, music, art, and film.  Some strategies to consider*:

 

1. Exemplification: Provides examples or cases in point. Are there examples – facts, statistics, cases in point, personal experiences, interview questions – that were added to help the author achieve the purpose of his or her text?

 

1. Description: Details sensory perceptions of a person, place, or thing. Does a person, place, or thing play a prominent role in the text? Does the tone, pacing, or overall purpose of the essay benefit from sensory details?

 

1. Narration: Recounts an event. Is the narrator trying to report or recount an anecdote, an experience, or an event? Is it telling a story?

 

1. Process analysis: Explains to the reader how to do something or how something happens. Were any portions of the text more clear because concrete directions about a certain process were included?

 

1. Comparison and contrast: Discusses similarities and differences. Does the text contain two or more related subjects? How are they alike? different?

 

1. Division and classification: Divides a whole into parts or sorts related items into categories. Is the author trying to explain a broad and complicated subject? Does it benefit the text to reduce this subject to more manageable parts to focus the discussion?

 

1. Definition: Provides the meaning of the terms used. Who is the audience? Does the text focus on any abstract, specialized, or new terms that need further explanation so the readers understand the point?

 

1. Cause and effect analysis: Analyzes why something happens and describes the consequences of a string of events. Does the author examine past events or their outcomes? Is the purpose to inform, speculate, or argue about why an identifiable fact happens the way it does?

 

*From “Rhetorical Strategies for Essay Writing,” http://www.nvcc.edu/home/lshulman/rhetoric.htm

 

Rhetorical Strategies for Film

 

In addition to the above strategies and the Aristotelian appeals, some strategies to consider for film:

 

• Music: How does the music affect the audience?  In what ways does the music reinforce the visual and/or verbal message?  Does it inspire calm or fright?  Is it happy or sad?  Is it childish or artistic?  Does it have lyrics?  If so, how do they reinforce the message?  Is it representative of something else (a national anthem, hymn, etc.)?

 

• Shot Type: How does the camera angle affect the audience’s perception of what is happening?  Are the shots close-ups or panoramic?  What is the atmosphere of the shot (is there anything going on in the background)?  How does the background (or lack thereof) affect the message?  What colors are in the shot?  What kind of lighting is used?

 

• Clip Editing: How does the editor choose when to end a clip?  Does it seem like more was left out?  Are the clips long or short?  Is anything added to the stock footage (drawings, subtitles, cartoon bubbles, etc.)?

 

• Sequence: What is the sequencing of clips (what clips are placed back-to-back)? How does this affect the relative significance of each (dispositio)?  Is there a montage effect?  Are the clips presented chronologically, or do they have flashbacks/flashforwards?

 

• Genre: How well does the film fit into a particular genre (documentary, thriller, romantic comedy, film noir, etc.)?  Given the genre of the film, what strategies does the viewer expect (inventio)?  Does the film ever digress from the conventions of the genre?  What is the effect of the expectations and digressions on the audience’s reception of the message?

 

• Structure: How is the content organized?  Does one individual dominate the film, or are there multiple stories, voices, or protagonists?  If there are multiple individuals involved, are they shown working in collaboration, are their parts parallel and interrelated, or are they disconnected?  Is the point-of-view personal or formal?

 

• Audience Knowledge: What knowledge, texts, situations, or people does the film expect the audience to be aware of?  What connotations does the audience have of these other sources, and how does this affect the interpretation of what is being viewed?

 

Useful Links:

 

“Writing About Film.”  <http://www.dartmouth.edu/~writing/materials/student/humanities/film.shtml>

“Film Analysis Web Site 2.0.” < http://classes.yale.edu/film-analysis/index.htm>

 

Structure and Organization

 

It is important to consider the organization of information and strategies in any text. Some elements of structure to consider:

 

Type of Organization:

 

• Topical: The argument is organized according to subtopics, like describing a baby’s bubble bath first in terms of the soap used, then the water conditions, and lastly the type of towels.

 

• Chronological: The argument is organized to describe information in time order, like a baseball game from the first pitch to the last at-bat.

 

• Spatial: The argument follows a visual direction, such as describing a house from the inside to the outside, or a person from their head down to their toes.

 

• Problem – Solution: The argument presents a problem and a possible solution, such as making coffee at home to avoid spending extra money.

 

• Cause and effect: Describes the relationship between the cause or catalyst of an event and the effect, like identifying over-consumption of candy as the cause of tooth decay.

 

Logical Order of Information:

 

• Inductive: Moving from one specific example to draw a general conclusion.

 

• Deductive: Moving from a generalized theory or assumption to decide the causes or characteristics of a specific example or event.

 

• Linear: The argument is told in linear order, scaffolding information or reasoning.

 

• Circular: Supporting the argument using assumptions or information from the argument itself.

 

• Recursive: The text consistently moves forward, but circles back on specific points in the process.