syllabus
calendar
blackboard
student.email resources

last.updated 10.28.07

Textbook Rhetoricians

Purpose

Many of our current textbooks use the theories of rhetoric or communication developed by K. Burke, C. Rogers, and/or S. Toulmin to teach students how to compose arguments, or other persausive prose. And in some situations, these theories are taught in addition to Aristotle; while in others, they are taught as an alternative to this classiscal Greek standard. In today's class we will examine these rhetorical theories and interrogate their appropriateness for the first year composition course.

Before Class

• Read Burke "The Five Key Terms of Dramatism" [BB]
• Read Rogers "Dealing with Breakdowns in Commuication" [BB]
• Read Ede "Is Rogerian Rhetoric Really Rogerian?" [Rhetoric Review, 3.1]
• Read Toulmin "The Layout of Arguments" [BB]
• Submit PAB #5 to the Blackboard Discussion Board by the beginning of class

FreeWrite

If you were to design a textbook, which rhetorical theorist that we have read (or that you have read on your own) would you use to teach students how to write/persaude? Why?

Questions and Discussion (by Mimi Leonard)

Kenneth Burke
Burke’s pentad is a tool that allows an audience to pinpoint areas of ambiguity. By understanding the interactions between an act, scene, agent, agency, and purpose, deeper understandings of arguments and positions is possible.

"The Container and the Thing Contained" places emphasis on the scene because an act (what happens) does not occur in a vacuum, but takes its meaning in part because of the setting or situation (scene). Likewise, the agent functions within that scene, and is somewhat colored by it. As Burke puts it, “the nature of acts and agents should be consistent with the nature of the scene” (p. 3).

In making this point, Burke gives a couple of literary examples. He uses Ibsen’s An Enemy of the People to model the scene:act ratio (3-6), and Wordsworth for the scene:agent ratio (8). If you were teaching these ratios, what texts or examples might you use to demonstrate how scene, act, and agent correspond.

Stephen Toulmin
Toulmin, a logician, states that "the two-fold distinction between 'premisses' and ‘conclusion’ appears insufficiently complex," and instead needs "at least the four-fold distinction between 'datum,' 'conclusion,' 'warrant,' and 'backing' (p. 106). Why do you agree or disagree?

Burke and Toulmin
Burke and Toulmin dissect argumentation to obtain a fuller, more precise understanding of a position. In what sorts of compositions is this level of depth warranted?

Carl Rogers and Burke
Rogers notes that communication breaks down because of our inclinations "to judge, to evaluate, to approve or disapprove," (p. 330) with our own "frame of reference" (p. 331) becoming an obstacle. This view builds on Burke, who says that "since no two things or acts or situations are exactly alike, you cannot apply the same term to both of them without thereby introducing a margin of ambiguity" (p. xix). Can these assertions be reconciled? That is, if Burke is correct in noting that misunderstandings occur because of differences in perspective, does Rogers oversimplify or exaggerate when he says that "breakdowns in communication…can be avoided," (p. 336) if one is bold enough to be empathetic with another?

Carl Rogers and Lisa Ede
"Dealing with Breakdowns in Communication - Interpersonal and Intergroup" attempts to transfer insights from psychotherapy to the field of communication despite Rogers’ acknowledgement that we are sometimes reluctant to use insights across disciplines (p.335). Ede’s critique of Rogerian Rhetoric (especially as expressed by Young, Becker, and Pike in 1970’s Rhetoric: Discovery and Change) faults the “inevitable separation of writer and reader,” (p. 46) as a key reason why Rogers’ ideas cannot function well in written arguments. How might Rogers’ ideas be more effective if applied to new media – social networking sites, YouTube videos, blogs, wikis?