Final CCPA

enthymeme

NOT a complete syllogism, a proper enthymeme must contain at least ONE premise and a relevant conclusion

Invention

best enthymeme rely upon unspoken premises that are entrenched in audience values

Invention

audience is likely to accept enthy. if they believe the unspokken premise to be true

The best enthymemes rely..

Upon unspoken premises that are entrenched in the audience values

An audience is likely to accept an enthymeme if

They believe the unspoken premise to be true

A proper enthymeme must contain

at least one premise and relevant conclusion

Three forms of proof

Ethos, pathos, logos

Ethos

Credibility and morality

Pathos

Appeals to the emotions of the audience

Logos

Appeals to reason and logic

2 types of reasoning

Inductive and deductive

Inductive

Synthetic process that moves from particulars to provable conclusions

Deductive

An analytic process that moves from generalities to structurally certain conclusions

Always look at the reasoning and data DO NOT look simpley at conclusion

logos is about persuasion, and aristotle tought …

the enthymeme was the core of persuasion

demagogue

A political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than using rational argument

Aristotle’s Definition of Rhetoric

The faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion

Deliberation

Communication of support or position to some future policy action

Deliberation assumptions

1. A universal logic exists

2. best mode of decision making is testing logic and reason through arguments and debate

Deliberation goals and skills

1. understand basics of logic and reason

2. understand relationship between arguments and evidence

3. understand and evaluate the varieties of evidence

4. bracket yourself from biases

Deliberation 3 types of propositions

1. proposition of value

2. proposition of fact

3. proposition of policy

Invention

priority for orators. art of finding something to say

Aristotle in invention.

primary function of rhetoric

Invention, topics

were divided in common and especial

topics

types of arguments

special topics referenced type of speeches:

epideictic, deliberative, forensic

epideictic

honoring something or someone. rooting in present

deliverative

policy action (Should do). Rooted in the future. always involves risk.

Forensic

dealing w courts, judicial. In the past. less risk. whether it happened or not

stasis

method for generating ideas. Refers to types of questions. ( about any things given to think about)

Translative stasis

questions of jurisdiction

conjectural stasis

questions of fact

definitional stasis

questions of definition

Burden of proof

obligation of a party to provide a minimum amount of proof for their affirmative position. Party negates presumption.

Once you choose a position, you have the burdon of proof.

Epistemic Burden of proof

2 having a discussion. 1 affirms the others dispute, so it affirms Burden of proof to substantiate or prove their claim

forensic Burden of proof

how much proof is needed to meet the burden of proof?

policy of deliberation Burden of proof

those arguing either agents of change pr agents of status quo. Agent of change vs status quo. Agent change has burden of proof

inductive arguments

from example. analogy. correlation.

inductive Argument by example

examines several specific cases in a given class.

assumes if cases are alike w regard to specific characteristic.

inductive Argument by analogy

1 example but looking at a bunch of characteristics

inductive Argument by causal correlation

specific cases, classes, or both in order to identify functional correlation between particular elements.

1st element is cause, the one that follows, effect

deductive arguments

casual generalization

arguments from sign

deductive argument from casual generalization

applies an assumed, or indeductevely established causal relationship to specific cases pr classes

conclusions may be either specific or general.

Take a conclussion that is already made

Tests of casual generalization

Arguments from sign

every substance had a certain distinguish characteristic or attributes and precense or absence of either the substance :: may be taken as a sign of presence or absence of the other

in most arguments relationship btw substance and attribute is never really expressed, bit reliability of that relationship is critical

deductive argument from sign

casual generalization and argument sign are mirror opposites of each other

casual generalization- cause leads to effect

argument from sign; effect must have a cause

Toulim model

stephen toulmin developed a shorthand model to understand argument forms (BEST WAY TO EVALUATE)

It provides a quick way to evaluate the strenght of an argument.

argument is a deductive or inductive and makes a claim

1. Claim- conclusion

assesion, fact, opinion

2. Data- evidence

something outside of yourself, coming ftom the world, data.

Evidence alone is not an argument, uuses claim to tie together

3. warrant- reasoning

Unspoken, but reasoning that attaches xlaim to data. lead us go probable conclusiom theory that ties them

arguments when add other things.

arguments are as good as itrs data

challenges of mainstream

1 loss of faith in media

2 hugh cost

citizen ournalism

4 ambiguity between news and opinion

5. increasing polarizied populance and selection bias

3 dimensions or argument effectiveness

1. Credibility

2. Relevance

3. Threshold

Credibility

Accuracy and trust worthiness

Relevance

Applicable to be issue at hand

Threshold

How much evidence is enough?

More evidence, higher risk

Lower the threshold, less evidence and risk

Arguments of concepts

3 types of prepositions

1 questions of fact

2 questions of evidence

3 questions of policy

What is an entry meme

Deductive argument that has one of its premises missing.

A complete enthymeme must have at least ONE premise and a conclusion

3 types of inductive arguments

1 arguments from example

2 argument from analogy

3 argument from casual correlation

2 types of deductive arguments

1 argument from causal generalization

2 argument from sign

Burke goals1

1: provide alternate principles on which to base “solutions to social, political and economic issues facing the world

Burke goals 2

2:create grammar fot understanding human relationship and motivations.

Linked together to human relations