AP Language Mrs. Hartnett RHETORIC & ARGUMENTATION

Rhetorical Analysis Separate content from method Focus on how it is being said instead of primarily on what is being said What

Questions leading to analysis What is the writer's explicit purpose? Which methodologies are employed (logos, ethos, pathos, form, style, devices) to convince the audience? What stance does the writer seem to be taking towards the audience? What stance does the writer seem to be taking towards the content? What hidden assumptions or prejudices are implicit in the piece?

Aristotelian Rhetorical Forms LogosEthosPathos

Aristotelian Components of Rhetoric Speaker / Writer / Storyteller Message / Story Audience

Ethos Convincing through the character or credibility of the persuader Ethos Argument ExampleWhich credible source? "He is a forensics and ballistics expert for the federal government – if anyone’s qualified to determine the murder weapon, it’s him." "Our expertise in roofing contracting is evidenced not only by our 100 years in the business and our staff of qualified technicians, but in the decades of satisfied customers who have come to expect nothing but the best." "You know me – I’ve taught Sunday School at your church for years, babysat your children, and served as a playground director for many summers." My three decades of experience in public service, my tireless commitment to the people of this community, and my willingness to reach across the aisle and cooperate with the opposition, make me the ideal candidate for your mayor." "If his years as a Marine taught him anything, it’s that caution is the best policy in this sort of situation."

Pathos A convincing argument by creating an emotional response Pathos Argument ExamplesWhich emotion? "If we don’t move soon, we’re all going to die! Can’t you see how dangerous it would be to stay?” "Where would we be without this tradition? Ever since our forefathers landed at Plymouth Rock, we’ve celebrated Thanksgiving without fail, making more than cherished recipes. We’ve made memories." "They’ve worked against everything we’ve worked so hard to build, and they don’t care who gets hurt in the process. Make no mistake, they’re the enemy, and they won’t stop until we’re all destroyed." You’ll make the right decision because you have something that not many people do: you have heart.” "Better men than us have fought and died to preserve this great nation. Now is our turn to return the favor. For God and country, gentlemen!" “You will never be satisfied in life if you don’t seize this opportunity. Do you want to live the rest of your years yearning to know what would have happened if you just jumped when you had the chance?”

Logos Persuading an audience through reason Logos Argument ExampleType of reasoning "The data is perfectly clear: this investment has turned a profit year- over-year, even in spite of market declines in other areas." "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury: we have not only the fingerprints, the lack of an alibi, a clear motive, and an expressed desire to commit the robbery… We also have video of the suspect breaking in. The case could not be more open and shut." "More than one hundred peer-reviewed studies have been conducted over the past decade, and none of them suggests that this is an effective treatment for hair loss.” “The algorithms have been run in a thousand different ways, and the math continues to check out.” "He has a track record of success with this company, culminating in some of our most acclaimed architecture to date and earning us Firm of the Year nine times in a row.” “Research compiled by analysts from NASA, as well as organizations from five other nations with space programs, suggests that a moon colony is viable with international support.”

Elements of Critical Thinking - See more at: ObservationsFactsInferencesAssumptionsOpinionsArgumentsAnalysis The process is not linear; rather, as we go about establishing our opinions and crafting our arguments, we return to our observations and facts, drawing new inferences and forming new assumptions that, in turn, affect the arguments that we are trying to make.

Another Rhetorical Triplet: Toulmin Claim: The main idea, thesis, opinion, or belief of the argument answering the question, “What’s the point?” Support: The statements or examples that back up the claim in the form of facts, data, personal experience, expert opinion, evidence from texts or sources, emotional appeals, or other means. The more reliable and comprehensive the support, the more likely the audience is to accept the claim. Warrant: The connection, often unstated and assumed, between the claim and the supporting reason(s), or support. Warrants are assumptions that make the claim seem plausible. Or, said another way, warrants are the beliefs, values, inferences, and/or experiences that the writers/speakers assume they share with their audiences. If the audience doesn’t share these assumptions of the writer/speakers, the argument will not be effective.

Examples of Claim, Support, and Warrant: Situation: A lawyer is in court, defending his client who has been accused of murder. Claim: My client is innocent of the murder. Support: My client was out of town when the murder took place. Warrant: One must be physically present in order to commit a murder.

Examples of Claim, Support, and Warrant: Situation: Two men, new employees at the same company, are talking. Allen says to Pierre: “You’d better gain some weight and get in shape or you’ll never find yourself a wife. All the desirable men on TV are buff.” Claim: Pierre won’t be able to find a wife if he doesn’t gain weight and tone up. Support: Desirable men on TV are buff. Warrants: TV is a reliable index of social reality. Pierre is heterosexual. Pierre does not already have a wife. Pierre wants to get married. Heterosexual women have universal taste (they only care about looks and don’t like fat or non-athletic men.) Pierre is able to control his weight (and doesn’t have a medical condition, etc.) and has interest in working out.

Logical Fallacies Flaws in reasoning. Logical fallacies are like tricks or illusions of thought. They're often very sneakily used by politicians and the media to fool people.

Rhetorical Fallacies

Rhetorical Fallacies, cont’d

Red – Appeal to Emotion; Purple – Faulty Deduction

Rhetorical Fallacies, cont’d Purple – Faulty Deduction ; Green – Manipulating Content

Rhetorical Fallacies, cont’d Green – Manipulating Content

Rhetorical Fallacies, cont’d Green – Manipulating Content ; Pink – Garbled Cause & Effect

Rhetorical Fallacies, cont’d Blue – On the Attack

10 Most Common Rhetorical Fallacies 1. Ad hominem (meaning "against the person")—attacks the person and not the issue 2. Appeal to emotions —manipulates people's emotions in order to get their attention away from an important issue 3. Bandwagon —creates the impression that everybody is doing it and so should you 4. False dilemma —limits the possible choices to avoid consideration of another choice 5. Appeal to the people —uses the views of the majority as a persuasive device 6. Scare tactic —creates fear in people as evidence to support a claim 7. False cause —wrongly assumes a cause and effect relationship 8. Hasty generalization (or jumping to conclusions)—draws a conclusion about a population based on a small sample 9. Red herring —presents an irrelevant topic to divert attention away from the original issue 10. Traditional wisdom —uses the logic that the way things used to be is better than they are now, ignoring any problems of the past