Rhetorical Analysis

The ability to write effectively and persuasively is not dependent on an intimate knowledge of formal logic. However, being familiar with a few concepts and terms can help you identify problems with logic in what you read and can also help you clarify your own thinking and writing

Ask yourself these questions when you plan, write, and revise:

1. Have I presented enough evidence to support my thesis? Each point you make must be backed with reasons, examples, and illustrations. Writing that is not persuasive usually contains assertions the author did not support.
2. Have I presented enough evidence so that the reader sees and understands how it supports my thesis? Explain how evidence supports assertions.
3. Have I anticipated questions, objections, needs, or reservations the reader might have? Anticipate the questions that an antagonistic reader might raise. Think not only about the challenges that your readers might offer to your argument, but also about what you can do and say to meet your reader’s needs and to find a common ground.

Claims

A claim is proposition or thesis a writer tries to prove. There are 3 forms

1. Claims of Fact: An assertion that some thing or some condition has existed, now exists, or will exist. Some claims of fact involve commonplace information or easily verifiable information. Most claims of fact require supporting examples, data, statistics, or authoritative testimony.
2. Claims of Value: An assertion about the quality, morality, or worth of a condition, belief, action, or object. Claims of value are difficult to support because they are based on opinions that often differ from one person to another or one culture to another.
3. Claims of Policy: An argument advocating that a particular course of action or a particular policy be adopted. To be persuasive, claims of policy require the writer to outline clearly the proposed policy and to support that policy with reasons it should be implemented.

Appeals

An appeal is a rhetorical strategy used by a writer to persuade a reader to respond positively to the information or argument presented. An appeal is a way to get agreement or assent. Appeals are NOT direct requests; they are strategies inherent in the kind of information presented and in the way the information is presented. There are 3 basic types of appeals:

1. Logos Appeals: Appeals that directly involve the information you present and your reasoning behind it. Such appeals depend on the writer and reader agreeing about which information is important and which ways of presenting and analyzing that information are effective. Logos appeals rely heavily on factual data presented.
2. Ethos Appeals: Appeals designed to persuade readers that a writer’s argument should be accepted or at least carefully considered because of that writer’s experience, knowledge, or character, or references to other experts. Most ethos appeals establish the expertise or experience that makes the writer especially well qualified to argue a particular position.
3. Pathos Appeals: Appeals designed to elicit an emotional response from the audience. Overdone emotional appeals can become too obvious and work against you.

Fallacies

Fallacies are arguments that contain misleading or deceptive reasoning. There are several types:

1. Appeal to Tradition: Appeals to our loyalty to long-established ways of doing things or thinking about things. Basically, the argument is "we should continue to think this way or to do things this way because we have done so for a long time and to change would violate this tradition."
2. Appeal to the People (ad populum): Appeal based on the common desire to be a part of a larger group whose ideals, beliefs, and objectives we share. Politicians make use of this appeal when they stress the greatness of our nation or rely on patriotic sentiments.
3. Argument to the Person (ad hominum): Attempt to undercut the character or authority of the opponent so that the audience will not seriously consider his or her arguments. Such arguments can involve distortion.
4. Hasty Generalization: Conclusions based on insufficient evidence. Prejudices are often based on hasty generalizations.
5. Faulty Cause-Effect: Arguing that because one event occurred after another, the first event caused the second event. For example, if you have a freak accident after seeing a black cat, this does not necessarily mean that the cat caused the accident.
6. Slippery Slope: Used to describe the argument that if one condition is allowed, it will inevitably lead to a second undesirable condition.
7. Either/Or: The writer asserts that only two options exist and insists that the reader must choose between the two. Such a fallacy often simplifies a situation or issue.
8. Faulty Analogy: Comparing two things that do not match up logically.
9. Straw Man: Involves the misrepresentation of someone else’s argument or claim to provide an easier target for attack. The attack on the “straw man” is a diversion from more substantive issues in the argument.
10. Card Stacking, or Stacking the Deck: Giving only evidence to support one’s own view without acknowledging other viewpoints or other evidence.