Argument is Inquiry (WA Chapter 2)

1. Argument is Inquiry(WA Chapter 2) CS4001 Kristin Marsicano

2. Exploring Issues • At the beginning of the chapter, the authors provide some suggestion they may prove useful when you are exploring your paper topic

3. Exploring Issues • At the beginning of the chapter, the authors provide some suggestion they may prove useful when you are exploring your paper topic • What is involved with each of the following? Have you tried any of these approaches before? • Freewriting • Idea Mapping • Playing the believing and doubting game

4. Strategies for Reading Arguments • Why should we practice reading arguments? What are some specific scenarios or situations for which it is important to master reading arguments? • The authors suggest a sequence of strategies for reading arguments—what are they?

5. Strategies for Reading Arguments • Read as a believer • Read as a doubter • Explore the rhetorical context and genre • Consider alternative views, and analyze sources of disagreement

6. Reading as a Believer • Practice “empathic listening” (see the world through the author’s eyes) • Requires putting aside your own viewpoint for the moment • For this AND the other steps in reading arguments effectively, you must: • read the argument carefully for general meaning • analyze each paragraph for does and says

7. Reading as a Believer: Does/Says • Analyze each paragraph for does and says: • a does statement identifies a paragraph’s function • a says statement summarizes the paragraph’s content • Practice: “Amnesty?” article • Review the does/says analysis given for the first 6 paragraphs • With a partner, complete the does/says analysis for the remaining 7 paragraphs

8. Reading as a Doubter • Question writer's logic, evidence, assumptions • Determine what the writer leave out or glosses over • Practice: Re-read “Amnesty?” as a doubter • Write doubts in the margins • Ask for proof and challenge assumptions

9. Reading as a Doubter • Some of the WA book author’s thoughts on “Amnesty?” article: • Intro paragraph seems sensational • Argument often based upon vague statements about the opposition • Doesn’t provide specific data about the effects of NAFTA • References opinion columns/popular books/radio shows that seems to suggest the opposition is simplistic and ignorant • Given his background, he draws hardly any line between church and state; however many US citizens believe government should be secular

10. Rhetorical Context and Genre • What genre of argument is this? • Who is the author? What are his/her credentials and investment in the issue? • What motivating occasion prompted the writing? E.g. current event, a crisis, pending legislation, etc. • What is the authors purpose? Where do they fall on the truth seeking vs. persuasion continuum? • What information about the publication or source helps explain the writers perspective or the structure and style of the argument? • What is the writers angle of vision (filter/lens/selective seeing through which writer is approaching the issue)?

11. Thinking Dialectically • Seeking Alternative views and analyzing sources of disagreement • Seeking out the opposing view. • Usually two types of disagreements: • Disagreements about facts or relevance • Disagreements about underlying beliefs, values, or assumptions • Three ways to foster dialectic thinking: • Effective discussions • Reading logs • Formal exploratory essay