Week 4

Monday

Team B - In Person

Political Argument - (Continued)

  • Discussing student questions / key moments in the text
  • Considering “sound bites” and slogans which relate to what Fish calls the stylized exchange associated with talking points Examples shared to class MS Teams
    • Are all of Luntz' “bite-sized layered arguments” signs of argument reduced to stylized “talking points” (53)? Can they legitimately persuade? Are they deceptively manipulative? Both? (See p. 74 “'Marriage Equality' is a slight of hand parading as an argument. But … it now is an argument … (60)

Concluding Political Argument

  • Why does Fish think often “Evidence doesn't do it”? (60) and, so, what DOES cause a change or allow one side to WIN a political argument?
  • What is a “bounded-argument space” (72)?
  • How are “foundationalism” and “anti-foundationalism” brought back into the discussion about the role of argument? (pp 86-90)

Homework: Read C3 - Fish - Domestic Argument In MS Teams: 1) Post a question about the chapter (something you find puzzling and we must discuss); OR 2) comment on Fish's five “general rules” of domestic quarrels; OR 3) consider how persuasive you find his description of domestic arguments.


Tuesday

All students - Great Hall

  • Questions
  • What are Fish's five “general rules”?
  • Does his overview of the challenges (and solutions) in domestic argument persuade you?

Short Essay

Discuss short essay assignment.

Homework: A) Read Fish, Ch 5 Academic Arguments. Note, we will go back to Ch 4, but I wanted us to be thinking about academic argument as you prepare for your first essay. B) Begin brainstorming a topic for your short essay. Share notes in the “Short Essay” folder within the MS Onedrive class notebook.


Thursday

Team A - In Person

Fish Reading - kinds of argument

  • recap discussion of domestic argument
  • intro to Academic Argument
    • requirements of originality and tradition/context/ “interpretive community” (160)
    • boundaries: how methods or what's allowed can be challenged or changed (167); anecdote of graduate student (168)
    • “not all bounded spaces are the same” (170); how do political, domestic, and academic arguments compare in their boundedness?
    • How do the examples of Holocaust denial and Creationism fit Fish's picture of acacdemic arguments/boundaries?

Short Essay: Peer activity

  • What kind of argument are you considering making?
  • Share your topic brainstorming with a peer; how does it fit with “ongoing conversation” (167) and what kinds of moves can you possibly make in writing?

HW: for next class

Read C4 Legal Arguments. Reflect on the differences and similarities between the four kinds of argument you now understand (or the four kinds of bounded argument spaces). How would you relate them back to the core questions? Are each of these arguments aiming at establishing knowledge, supporting belief? Would they claim to establish truth? Is their aim better described in some other way? Post your response to MS Teams (see prompt there)

Ongoing … short essay

Please begin working on an outline and then some freewrite drafting. For Tuesday I would like everyone to have a 2 page rough draft, on paper, in class! (RD due 9/22; Final Draft due Friday: 9/25).


Friday

Team B - In Person

Questions about short essay? short essay assignment

IUP Writing Center

Discussion of Reading

  • Boundaries and flexibility
    • Brianna: “I agree with Gabby in the sense that Fish describes the arguments in a way that's non-negotiable and the only “correct” ways to pursue an argument in the respective categories. ”
    • How can the methods or what's allowed can be challenged or changed (167) (see also 170-1).
    • How do the examples of Holocaust denial and Creationism fit Fish's picture of acacdemic arguments/boundaries?
  • Legal Arguments
    • What does Fish mean when he says legal argument operates “against a background of some authorized institutional fiction [emph. added]]”? 136-7
    • (see also: plain meaning rule, pp. 151-3)

Sythesizing Discussion Question (from last night)

Reflect on the differences and similarities between the four kinds of argument you now understand (or the four kinds of bounded argument spaces). How would you relate them back to the core questions? Are each of these arguments aiming at establishing knowledge, supporting belief? Would they claim to establish truth? Is their aim better described in some other way?


HW: For Monday

Read Fish C6. Begin drafting your essay (complete draft, with title, is due in class on paper Tuesday).