1. Rhetoric & Critical Thinking
~ and the Rhetorical Situation
(An ongoing PowerPoint by Jo Doran)

2. What - Exactly - is Rhetoric?!
Rhetoric has been described as the study of speaking and writing - and the art of persuasion.
Some people describe it as “hot air,” designating rhetoric as a negative influence in any type of communication.
Classical rhetoric - the origin of rhetoric, so to speak - categorizes rhetoric as persuasive discourse (communication) for three situations: forensic, deliberative, and epideictic.

3. Forensic, Deliberative, Epideictic Rhetoric
Forensic rhetoric addresses issues of justice and concerns the past.
Deliberative rhetoric exhorts or persuades, while keeping an eye to the future.
Epideictic rhetoric is used to praise, and sometime blame, and concerns the present.

4. Rhetoric in This Class
In this class, we will use rhetoric as explained below:
Rhetoric is the use of language and other mediums, such as images, etc., to present ideas to others in order to communicate, be understood, and understand.
Rhetoric always involves the use of the three rhetorical appeals - to some degree.
Rhetoric should include an understanding of the rhetorical situation.

5. Rhetorical Appeals Logos Pathos Ethos
Logos is the logic used in a text, design, etc.
Logos includes information, statistics, and facts.
Pathos
Pathos is the emotion used in a text, design, etc., and should include a consideration of the following:
Excessive use of emotion
A lack of emotion
Bias
Ethos
Ethos is the credibility of the author and the content.
Ethos can include the use or misuse of credible sources: other people’s ideas and words. reputation of the author(s).
Ethos can refer to the reputation of the author, if that person is well known.

6. The Rhetorical Situation
The Rhetorical Situation includes the interaction between the text, the reader, and the writer - within a context of culture. We will discuss this more when we talk about Discourse Communities.

7. Genre, Rhetorical Situations and Writing Strategies ~ Jo Doran

8. Aside from annotating…
We have to consider the genre of the text, visual, etc.:
What kind of text is it?
Story?
Report?
Biography?
Proposal?
When is it used?
What is it used for?

9. Open Language Open language is informal, wordy, more reflective.
Very Open Language:
Diary
Journal
Letters
Somewhat Open Language
Poetry
Fiction

10. Closed Language Closed language is objective, clear, concise.
Very Closed Language:
Dictionary
Encyclopedia
Statistic Report
Somewhat Closed Language
Journal Article
White Paper Report

11. Discourse Communities
Members: Who belongs to the group?
Purpose: What is the purpose of the group?
Goals: What is the group trying to do?
Audience: To whom is the group addressing aside from its members?
Communication: What methods of communication are used . . .
Within the group?
Outside of the group?

12. Rhetorical Situation Text/Purpose: Type of genre and purpose of genre
Audience: Inside the group - and outside the group
Writer/Author: Members of the discourse community

13. Writing Strategies How is a piece best written?
This is determined by audience analysis.
What are the needs and interests of the audience?
How much/little information does the audience have?
What techniques can the writer use based on audience needs?
Type of language (open/closed, terminology, etc.): Conversational language? More formal?
Research level: How much research is best?
Medium: Text only - or visuals?

14. Rhetorical Appeals Logos: Facts, Data, Statistics, Information
Pathos: Emotion, Bias, etc.
Ethos: Reputation, Believability, etc.
Considerations of types (and levels) or rhetorical appeals needed - should be based on the genre being used and the audience needs.

15. Logical Fallacies
~ Jo Doran

16. Fallacies of Relevance
Appeal to Force:
Coercing a person
Teacher: If there is anyone in this class who is a pacifist, please leave now.
Everyone working here needs to elect Mr. Smith for the Board of Education position. You know what happened to Mr. Jones when he wouldn’t vote the right way, don’t you?

17. Fallacies of Relevance
Ad Hominem - Personal Attack:
Argument toward the man
Mr. Adam’s argument cannot be true because he’s an atheist.
We know that Father Brown will vote Yes on this because he’s a Christian.

18. Fallacies of Relevance
Argumentum ad Populum
Argument to the People
It must be ok; everyone I know is doing it.
If you’re an American, you can’t be against the war.

19. Fallacies of Relevance
Hasty Generalization:
Using an unreliable or non-specialized person to support an argument
Our children don’t believe they should go to bed at 9 p.m., so we don’t make them.
My favorite actress is Alfre Woodard, and she’s a Christian Scientist - so I’m going to be one too.
Brad Pitt does X… so X is right.

20. Fallacies of Relevance
Appeal to Emotion
Wrong use of Pathos
It must be ok; everyone I know is doing it.
If you’re an American, you can’t be against the war.
Well, I believe it… All my professors do!

21. Fallacies of Relevance
Argument from Adverse Consequences:
Seeing an argument as false because the consequences or results of the argument are unpleasant or negative
The company doesn’t have to lower its costs, because then I might have to fire people I like.
We don’t have to write our wills, because I cannot handle thinking of something happening to you.

22. Fallacies of Relevance
Argument from Personal Incredulity
Basing a decision to disbelieve an argument based on lack of personal knowledge
What you’re saying is not true, because I don’t understand it.
There is no such thing as nano-technology, because I can’t see things that small.

23. Component Fallacies Related to inductive/deductive reasoning, which
includes syllogisms

24. Component Fallacies Begging the Questions:
Assuming a statement is true and basing a decision off an assumed correct statement
Stupid comments like Mr. Jones stated should not be addressed
Because he makes bad decisions, like giving money to people who don’t work, he shouldn’t be re-elected.

25. Component Fallacies Circular Reasoning:
Supporting an argument by using the basis of the argument
The bible says that God made the earth six days, and we know that’s true, so we should believe the bible.
Mr. Adams is right, because he always says the right thing, so he can’t be wrong.

26. Component Fallacies Hasty Generalization:
Jumping to Conclusions
That duck is a mallard, and that one, and that one… All the ducks in this park must be mallards.
Everyone I interviewed on my way to work thought that we don’t need to raise taxes. Therefore, everyone must believe that we don’t need to raise taxes.

27. Component Fallacies Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc:
After this, therefore because of this
Everyone I know who took Mr. Adam’s class failed. So I’m going to fail the class.
Every time my nephew plays violent games, he hits his brother. Playing violent games causes children to become violent.

28. Component Fallacies Straw Man Argument:
Oversimplifying an argument to pressure people to deny the argument
Mr. Smith wants us to give money to make this subdivision. He says that everyone should have a safe place to live. Yet we don’t have money to give everyone a safe place to live.

29. Component Fallacies Either/Or Fallacy
Offering only two choices
If you’re not for us, you’re against us.
Either we decide on Mr. Jones’ point, or we fail.

30. Component Fallacies Faulty Analogy:
Using a poor, weak, or wrong comparison to promote an argument
He looks like the guy who stole Jean’s wallet. Therefore, he must be bad.
Hillary is broken-down horse, and we all know that we put broken-down horses out to pasture.

31. Component Fallacies Tu Quoque
And you too!
The ABC Diet doesn’t work because it didn’t work for you.
You say smoking is wrong, but you smoke. Therefore, smoking can’t be wrong.

32. Component Fallacies Slippery Slope:
A leads to B, which leads to C, and finally D… so A leads to D
If you start drinking, you’ll start using pot, and then you’ll use meth, and then you’ll die. So if you start drinking, you’ll die from a drug overdose.
If we give Mr. Jones money to go on a trip to represent our company, he will just want money to go on more trips, and he’ll bankrupt us.

33. Component Fallacies Slippery Slope:
A leads to B, which leads to C, and finally D… so A leads to D
If you start drinking, you’ll start using pot, and then you’ll use meth, and then you’ll die. So if you start drinking, you’ll die from a drug overdose.
If we give Mr. Jones money to go on a trip to represent our company, he will just want money to go on more trips, and he’ll bankrupt us.

34. Fallacies of Ambiguity
Because of the use of ambiguous words and phrases, the meanings are unclear

35. Fallacies of Ambiguity
Equivocation:
Using a different definition of the word
“Sugar is an essential component of the body a key material in all sorts of metabolic processes.” Yet… the speaker here did not distinguish the difference between glucose (blood sugar) and sugar (sucrose).

36. Fallacies of Ambiguity
Composition
Arguing from parts of a whole to the thing itself
The parts of this machine are light. Therefore, the machine must be light.

37. Fallacies of Ambiguity
Division
Arguing from the thing itself to the parts
Martin is a great student in my class. Therefore, he must be a great student in every class and a great person.

38. Fallacies of Ambiguity
Reification
Treating a word as a concrete object
Mr. Jones said he was going to begin a war on poverty, so we had better be prepared for writing a peace treaty.

39. Fallacies of Ambiguity
Reification
Treating a word as a concrete object
Mr. Jones said he was going to begin a war on poverty, so we had better be prepared for writing a peace treaty.

40. Fallacies of Omission
Arguments based on missing information

41. Fallacies of Ambiguity
Stacking the Deck:
Only including points that support a particular argument
Since Jones did not address his opponent’s ideas, he stacked the deck.
That talk-show host stacked the deck by including stronger speakers for the side he favors.

42. Fallacies of Ambiguity
Argument from the Negative:
Stating that since one position id false, the opposite position must be true
Since we can’t make sure that everything on the Internet is true, it is always better to use printed materials.

43. Fallacies of Ambiguity
Appeal to Lack of Evidence:
Arguments presented where evidence is not or cannot be found
You can’t prove there is no God… therefore there is a God.
We can’t prove there isn’t live on other planets. Therefore, aliens are real.

44. Fallacies of Ambiguity
Amphiboly:
Ambiguity due to grammatical construction
“Lets eat Grandma!”

45. In-Class Assignment
In a moment, you will choose a slip of paper. Each slip of paper has one logical fallacy on it - as I went over in this PowerPoint.
Your Job: Make an argument - For or Against - the legalization of marijuana - using the logical fallacy on your slip of paper.
You will be asked to share your logical fallacy with the class.
You may work with your group members to get help/feedback.
Please Note: Your argument is supposed to be ‘bad’ (i.e. - illogical) in that you are using a logical fallacy. This does not have to reflect your true feelings..)

46. Syllogism:
“A formal, deductive argument made up of a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion.”

47. Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning
“Deductive reasoning arrives at a specific conclusion based on generalizations. Inductive reasoning takes events and makes generalizations.”
When we consider generalizations - and then come to a specific conclusion - we are using deductive reasoning.
Syllogisms use deductive reasoning.

48. Syllogisms Syllogisms must be valid if they are to be true.
Syllogisms must be sound if they are to be true.
Syllogisms are a form of formal logic.

49. Sample Syllogism All fish swim in water. Edward is a fish.
Edward swims in water.

50. Valid Syllogisms: 3 Criteria
A valid syllogism must categorical: “absolute, certain, and unconditional, with no room for doubt.”
All fish swim in water.
Edward is a fish.
Edward swims in water.
We have to be in agreement that all fish swim in water.
We have to be able to agree that a fish may be named Edward.

51. Valid Syllogisms: 3 Criteria
A valid syllogism must include a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion. (A premise is “a statement given as the evidence for a conclusion.”
All fish swim in water: Major Premise
Edward is a fish: Minor Premise
Edward swims in water: Conclusion

52. Valid Syllogisms Criteria #2.
3. A syllogism is valid only if it adheres to the above two criteria - and if it is structured properly (with a major term, a minor term, and a middle term).
We will call the Major Term A, the Minor Term B, and the Middle Term C.
All fish (A) swim in water (B).
Edward (C) is a fish (A).
Edward (C) swims in water (B).
Incorrect structuring invalidates the syllogism:
All fish (A) swim in water (B).
All fish (A) are named Edward (C).
All Edwards (C) swim in water (B).

53. Middle Term
The middle term is in both the major and the minor premises and serves to link the two premises.
The major term forms the conclusion.
The minor term is stated in the conclusion and forms the subject of the conclusion.
Below, the Middle Term is A, the Major Term is B, and the Minor Term is C.
All fish (A) swim in water (B).
Edward (C) is a fish (A).
Edward (C) swims in water (B).
Incorrect structuring invalidates the syllogism: Undistributed Middle Term
All fish (A) swim in water (B).
All fish (A) are named Edward (C).
All Edwards (C) swim in water (B).

54. Undistributed Middle Term
Penguins are black and white.
Old TV shows are black and white.
Therefore, penguins are old TV shows.
Middle Term: “Black and White”
Major Term: “Old TV shows”
Minor Term: “Penguins”

55. “Qualified” Syllogisms
Using a qualifier, such as “some,” requires certain rules. To qualify something means to limit it.
If one premise is qualified - then the conclusion must be qualified.
Some Italians are great cooks.
Joey is an Italian.
Therefore, Joey is a great cook..
Is this syllogism valid or invalid?
Why?

56. Qualified Syllogisms Is this a valid or invalid syllogism? Why?
Some Italians are great cooks.
Our visiting group of people are Italians.
Some of the visiting people are great cooks.
Is this a valid or invalid syllogism?
Why?
What is the middle term?
What is the major term?
What is the minor term?

57. Qualified Syllogisms What is the middle term? What is the major term?
What is the minor term?
Is this a valid or invalid syllogism?

58. Negative Syllogisms Both premises cannot be negative.
If either premise is negative, the conclusion must be negative.
No cat is a reptile
No reptile is warm blooded
Therefore, no cat is warm-blooded.
Is this a valid syllogism? Why/why not?
What is the middle term?
What is the major term?
What is the minor term?

59. Sample Syllogisms: Valid or Not?
Some snakes are poisonous.
No mammals are poisonous.
Therefore, no mammals are snakes.
Is this structured correctly for a negative syllogism?
Is this structured correctly for a qualified syllogism?
Is this a valid syllogism?
What is the middle term?
Is it distributed?
What is the major term?
What is the minor term?

60. Sample Syllogisms: Valid or Not?
Left-handed people are more prone to occupational injuries.
Jacquey is left handed.
Therefore, Jacquey is more prone to occupational injuries.
What is the middle term?
Is it distributed?
What is the major term?
What is the minor term?
Is this a valid or invalid syllogism?

61. Sample Syllogisms: Valid or Not?
Students who study hard get good grades.
Loretta gets good grades.
Therefore, Loretta studies hard.
What is the middle term?
Is it distributed?
What is the major term?
What is the minor term?
Is there a fallacy in the premise?
Is this a valid or invalid syllogism?

62. Fallacy in previous syllogism
Begging the Question or Affirming the Consequence:
Assuming that the statement made is true and can therefore be used as grounds for the argument.

63. Sample Syllogisms: Valid or Not?
Either the state must raise taxes or cut social services.
The state will not raise taxes.
Therefore, the state must cut social services.
What is the middle term?
Is it distributed?
What is the major term?
What is the minor term?
Is this a valid or invalid syllogism?
Is there a fallacy in this syllogism?

64. Sample Syllogisms: Valid or Not?
If deforestation continues, there will be more global warming.
We can see that there is more global warming.
Therefore, deforestation must be continuing.
What is the middle term?
Is it distributed?
What is the major term?
What is the minor term?
Is this a valid or invalid syllogism?
Is there a fallacy in this syllogism?

65. Sample Syllogisms: Valid or Not?
Some chimpanzees can be potty-trained.
Bonzo is a chimpanzee.
Therefore, Bonzo can be potty trained.
What is the middle term?
Is it distributed?
What is the major term?
What is the minor term?
Is this a valid or invalid syllogism?
Is there a fallacy in this syllogism?

66. Inductive Reasoning
When we begin with a specific idea and make generalizations about this idea, we are using inductive reasoning.
Inductive reasoning is a type of informal logic.
Inductive reasoning is not dependent on form or structure.
Inductive reasoning is a way of organizing ideas - ideas often presented as subjective ideas.
The worth of an inductive argument is based on the value to another person.

67. Deduction vs. Induction
Some men in the Navy get tattoos of anchors.
All my friends from my home town were in the Navy.
Some of them have tattoos of anchors.
____________________________________________
James has a tattoo of an anchor on his arm. He probably was in the Navy.

68. Inductive Reasoning

69. Inductive Reasoning

70. Deductive Reasoning

72. References
"Deductive versus Inductive Reasoning." Deductive versus Inductive Reasoning. The Naked Society, Web. 26 Feb
"Deductive Reasoning Rules for Valid Syllogisms PPT." California State Fullerton, n.d. Web. 26 Feb