1 / 19

Stasis and Toulmin Schema

Stasis and Toulmin Schema. Advanced Rhetorical Writing Matt Barton. Key Questions . What is “stasis” and what are “stasis questions?” What are “Toulmin schema?” Claims, Data, Warrants, Backing, Rebuttals, Qualifiers. Traditional Stasis.

eagan
Download Presentation

Stasis and Toulmin Schema

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Stasis and Toulmin Schema Advanced Rhetorical Writing Matt Barton

  2. Key Questions • What is “stasis” and what are “stasis questions?” • What are “Toulmin schema?” • Claims, Data, Warrants, Backing, Rebuttals, Qualifiers

  3. Traditional Stasis • The stasis approach is a way to get at the real issue at stake in a debate. • Conjectural (Question of Fact) • Definitional (Question of Definition) • Qualitative (Question of Quality) • Translative (Question of Jurisdiction)

  4. Ramage’s Model • Five Stasis Questions: • Definitional: What is it? • Resemblance: How much is it like something else? (Resemblance) • Causal: Why did it happen (or What might the consequences of it be?) • Evaluative/Ethical: How good or bad is it? • Proposal: What should we do about it?

  5. Definitional • The way we define something can have very real consequences! • Potential problems with defining something: • The criteria we use to determine class membership • The item in question might not match the criteria. • Marriage: The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.

  6. Resemblance Questions • Works by precedence or analogy. • Precedence: The present issue has much in common with older cases and should be treated consistently with past decisions. • Analogy: The present issue, which we don’t understand well, can be compared to an issue that we do understand well. • “Downloading music illegally is like shoplifting.”

  7. Causal Questions • What caused something to happen? What motivated someone to do something? • Correlation: Statistical relationships that suggest a connection between or among phenomena. • Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke at home or at work increase their risk of developing lung cancer by 20 - 30 percent. • Multiple Causes: How many factors might have influenced the result?

  8. Attacking Causal Arguments • My astrologist is amazingly accurate! She predicted something wonderful would happen to me this week, and I just got an A on my paper! • The “prediction” was extremely vague; something “wonderful” probably happens to everyone at least once a week. • I made an F on that test because my professor has a thick accent. • So not cracking the textbook had nothing to do with it? Why did most of your classmates do well?

  9. Evaluative Questions • What is “good?” • Evaluative: “Good job!” “I got a good deal on this car,” “That’s a good restaurant.” • Ethical: “He’s a good person,” “It’s not good to tell a lie,” “I strive to always do good.”

  10. Evaluative • What is a good college course? • What aspect/s are you concerned with? • What criteria will you base your judgment on? • What will you use as a basis for comparison? • Questionable criteria: • How fun is the course? • Is it an “EASY A” course? • Is the professor hot?

  11. Ethical • Principled Ethics: Appeal to an established body of doctrine. • Ten Commandments • Official Company Policy • Consequential Ethics: What are the actual consequences of the act? • Did the drunk driver only damage his own car and garage or kill a family of four?

  12. Proposal Questions • Proposals typically rely on the previous four types of argument. • What is the problem? • How serious is the problem? • What caused the problem? How will the proposed solution solve it? • How is this problem like/unlike other problems we’ve dealt with in the past?

  13. Proposal • What is the problem? • Very few college students vote in elections. • How serious is the problem? • Young people are severely underrepresented; legislation strongly favors older citizens. • What is your proposed solution? • We need to get more campaign ads on TV featuring young people. • How is this like other problems? • African American have voted more often when campaign ads feature black speakers and supporters.

  14. Arguing Backwards • Toulmin Schema: A way of breaking down an argument into parts. • Useful for testing arguments and building on them. • A Toulmin Schema is useful as a heuristic device. We use them to help us “get creative” with an argument.

  15. Toulmin Schema • Parts of an argument: • Grounds: Raw Data • Claim (or Conclusion): What person asserts about grounds (hypothesis) • Qualifiers: “Some,” “Many,” “A few” • Condition of Rebuttal: What would it take to successfully refute the claim? • Warrant: Reasons to support claim (evidence • Backing: Support for warrants

  16. Example • Grounds: • Babies who are exposed to secondhand smoke after birth are more likely to die from sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) than babies who are not exposed to cigarette smoke. • Claim: • People who smoke around babies are putting them in danger.

  17. Example • Warrants: • Exposure to second hand smoke increases the danger of SIDS. • Backing: • Scientific evidence: We should trust our scientists who have arrived at this data. • The studies were conducted by the U.S. Dept of Health and Human Services and have been confirmed by many professional medical associations.

  18. Example • Qualifiers: • Some/many/most/few babies exposed to second hand smoke develop SIDS. • Some/many/most/few babies who develop SIDS are not exposed to second hand smoke. • Conditions of Rebuttal: • Credible scientific evidence that demonstrates that second hand smoke does not affect SIDS.

  19. Toulmin Schema • Data: Attendance is up 1.5% at SCSU. • Claim: The campus beautification project is responsible for the increase. • Warrant: One new student claims that he chose SCSU because of the attractive plants and flowers on campus. • Backing: This student has no reason to lie; everyone prefers an attractive campus. • Conditions of Rebuttal?

More Related