Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Argument > Midterm Exam > Flashcards

Midterm Exam Flashcards

1
Q

What is the general form of an argument?

A
  1. Introduction: attention grabber + thesis/resolution/claim
  2. Body: subclaim 1-3
  3. Conclusion: thesis + greater takeaway
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Law of Noncontradiction

A
  • contradictory proposistions cannot be both true in the same sense at the same time
  • as students of argument, we will listen and look for these contradictions either explicityly or implicity in arguments
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Aristotle

What makes someone persuasive according to aristotle?

A
  1. ethos
  2. pathos
  3. logos
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Aristotle

Ethos

A
  • character
  • they know what they’re talking about
  • good will
  • good character
  • good sense
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

aristotle

pathos

A
  • emotion
  • argumentations isn’t merely logical, in the real world it appeals to emotions
  • smile
  • cadence
  • tone
  • common sense
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

aristotle

logos

A
  • the substance of one’s ideas is persuasive, but as aristotle teaches us, its not the whole of persuasion
  • you want to appeal to your audience
  • evidence
  • objective data
  • social consensus
  • “expert” testimony
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Caldini’s six techniques of persuasion

A
  1. code of reciprocity
  2. consistency
  3. social validation
  4. liking
  5. authority
  6. scarcity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

caldini

code of reciprocity

A

repay in kind for what they received (ex: free samples)
“You scratch my back, and I’ll scratch yours”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

caldini

consistency

A
  • desire to be seen as consistent (ex: “Will you please call if you decide to cancel?”)
  • Do your words match your actions?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

caldini

social validation

A

more likely to follow and be led by peer pressure
Others are doing it, so I should too

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

caldini

liking

A

people say “yes” to those that they like

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

caldini

authority

A

people are more likely to say “yes” and follow those who are percieved to be more credible (regardless if they are credible or not)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

caldini

scarcity

A

limited offerings (if something will run out of stock, I will secure it)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

what is rhetoric?

A
  • how signs persuade us; this is what creates our understanding of reality (i.e., how symbols influence us).
  • Practice of effective symbolic expression…
  • Rhetoric is a mode of altering reality by the creation of discourse (which changes reality through the mediation of thought and action).
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

what is argument?

A

units of discourse and the result of the practice of argumentation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What are the fundamental components of argument

A
  1. claim
  2. warrant
  3. evidence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

claim

A
  • Making a claim on your audience’s beliefs + it is what you want the other party to accept!
  • Claim of value/definition – “the president’ support is weakening” (problem/judgment)
  • Claim of fact – “Pitt is located in the city” (description of reality)
  • Claim of policy – “We should raise the tuition rate” (solution/what should be done)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

warrant

A
  • evidence that authorizes the claim … not immune to challenge
  • hidden message and relationship betweent he claim and evidence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

evidence

A

this is what you offer as support for the claim, your ground for believing it

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Bitzer vs. Vatz vs. Consigny

A
  • Vatz = rhetor/content
  • Consigny = rheotric is an “art” in indeterminate situations (some freedom choice)
  • Bitzer = context/ situation/ medium (empirically determinate)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Bitzer’s Views

A
  • CONTEX focused
  • situation driven approach
  • exigence = problem or issue that creates the need for rhetorical discourse
  • audience = individual or group of peple who can be influenced by the discourse & who have the power to address the audience
  • contstraints = limitations or factors that influence the rhetor’s ability to persuade the audience
22
Q

Bitzer

role of rhetor

A
  • the role of the rhetor (the person creating the persuasive message) is to recognize and respond to the rhetorical situation effectively
  • Rhetors should use available means of communication to address the exigence and influence the audience
23
Q

Bitzer

fitting response

A
  • one that effectively addresses the exigence and is appropriate to the constraints and the audience
  • Rhetors should tailor their discourse to the specific rhetorical situation
24
Q

situation rhetoric

A
  • rhetoric is fundamentally situational, meaning that persuasive discourse is shaped by the circumstances at hand
  • Rhetors must adapt their strategies to fit the unique features of each rhetorical situation
25
Q

Vatz’s views

A
  • CONTENT focused
  • speaker driven approach
  • rhetors create rhetorical situations rather than simply responding to pre-existing exigencies
  • rhetor’s perspective and choices play a crucial role in defining what becomes a rhetorical situation
  • rhetors are ones who chose to give particular sailence to situations and help craft their “reality”
  • rhetoric is a cause not an effect meaning
  • rhetoric is a creative act
26
Q

Consigny’s views

A
  • RHETOR has freedom on how they will structure the situation, but their freedom IS limited.
  • The rhetor is CONSTRAINED by the reality of the situation and the rules it innately contains within it
27
Q

how does Consigny agrees with Bitzer and Vatz

A
  • Bitzer = rhetorical situation is characterized by particualarities
  • Vatz = correctly treats the rhetor as creative
28
Q

how does Consigny disagree with Bitzer and Vatz

A
  • Bitzer = does not agree that the situation is inherently determinate
  • Vatz = fails to account for the real constraints in the rhetor’s activity
29
Q

What are the three different spheres of communication and argumentation?

A
  1. personal sphere
  2. technical sphere
  3. public sphere
30
Q

Personal sphere

A
  • friends, family members, romantic partners
  • there exists a bias towards agreement
  • the people will try to preserve the relationship
31
Q

Technical Sphere

A
  • argument is conditioned by the background knowledge, assumptions, and working practices of the relevant filed or domain
  • this PRIOR knowledge exludes people from the dialogue
32
Q

Public sphere

A
  • concerned with matters that affect the public
  • usually heterogeneous
  • participation in his dialogue is open to the public
  • robust public sphere is vital to democratic life
33
Q

Argumentations key social function is

A

to sustain democratic life

34
Q

What are the 5 argument schemes?

A
  1. argument from example
  2. argument from analogy
  3. argument from sign
  4. arugment from cause
  5. argument from form
35
Q

argument from example

A
  • Deductive – (general → specific) the act of backing up generalized statements with SPECIFIC scenarios
  • Inductive– (specific → general conclusion) act of making generalized conclusions based off specific scenarios
  • Ex. students 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 passed = the class passed
36
Q

Argument from Analogy

A
  • all about similarities (legal argument is based on precedent)
  • legal realm - established parallel cases (Roe vs. Wade)
  • moral realm - can there ever be a complete enumeration of evidence?
37
Q

Argument from Sign

A

Physical Observation – (ex. rooster crows → indication that it is morning)
Measureable Index – (ex. “smartness” → GPA, IQ, grades)

38
Q

Argument from Cause

A
  • claim
  • warrant
  • evidence
39
Q

Argument from Form

A
  • Argument/inferences based on the form the argument takes
  • CONTAINER – oral? written?
  • CONTAINED – shapes overall argument
40
Q

Stasis Theory

A
  • “Rest”/”Equilbrium”
  • this helps us understand what argument is really about
  • what does the argument fundamentally rest upon? what is the point of the argument?
  • controvery is the ultimate stasis point
  • it is what argument itself rests upon - diagreement
  • The “so what”
  • understanding the point opens avenues for resolution because both parties are on the same page
  • arguers are not talking past each other but with each other
41
Q

Stasis Theory

Fact/Conjecture

A
  • did it occur?
  • interaction between assertion and denial = determines the stasis
42
Q

Stasis Theory

Definition

A
  • the act occured but what was it?
  • to select a stasis in definition, implicitly grants the opponents claim in conjecture
43
Q

Stasis Theory

Quality

A

the act occured, we know what it is, but was it justified

44
Q

Stasis Theory

Place

A
  • is it the right forum for an argument?
  • questions of place therefore can play a great role in determining how a controversy will be talked about
45
Q

Evidence Types

Objective Data

A
  • independently verified and widely agreed to and does not require the arguer’s intervention
  • examples/illustrations = pathos
  • statistics = logos
  • tangible objects = logos
  • direct observations = personal experience
46
Q

Evidence Types

Social Consensus

A
  • previously established claims
  • commonplace (types of general patterns of issues)
  • shared value judgments
  • shared historical understanding
47
Q

Evidence Types

testimony

A

source credibility is important…function of one’s track record

48
Q

Argument Structures

Multiple

A
  • subsidary claims are independent of each other
  • subsidiary claims individually establish the main claim
49
Q

Argument Structures

Coordinative

A
  • subsidiary claims are independent of each other
  • subsidiary claims, taken together, establish the main claim
50
Q

Argument Structures

Subordinative

A
  • subsidiary claims are not independent of each other
  • subsidiary claims, taken together, establish the main claim

Argument (1 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions