Toulmin Argument

The Toulmin argument seems really complicated in analysis. It seems like the argument itself is common sense, yet it doesn't make a lot of sense if you try to pin point each element of the toulmin style. I think your brain naturally works out the warrants and qualifiers and rebuttals on its own rather than analyzing it so extensively. The Toulmin argument consists of six elements. These elements include: data, claim, warrants, qualifiers, rebuttals, and backing. In the Toulmin argument, you want to make your point clear right away. The claim is what you are proposing to the reader, with the intent for them to accept your claim as truth. Next, the data is used to support the claim that you make. Often, the data and the claim are not connected or not entirely related. When this is the case, a warrant is used to explain why the data backs up the claim. Specific words are used to connect the data and the claim, which often need to be identified or clarified in order to strengthen the connection between warrants and claims. These qualifiers are often definitive words. Backing statements provide extra support to your claim as they provide additional evidence to whatever it is your are trying to prove. Finally, rebuttals are necessary in a Toulmin argument because it is important to bring in at least one opposing view to what you are trying to prove, for the purpose of acknowledging the other side. This acknowledgement provides ethical strength to your argument, because it shows that you are aware of what the opposition has to say, and while being aware you can still prove your point. 

Modern and Postmodern Rhetoric

Rhetoric in general has seen a decline from the beginning of the 20th century. Prior to the 20th century, rhetoric seemed to be one of the main subjects that were studied in universities. Today, the study of rhetoric seems to be much less common. I have met several people who didn't know what rhetoric was when I told them that I was majoring in it, and then I would have to explain. In the past, I think the existence of rhetoric was probably common knowledge, just like it is common knowledge that math and science exist. In the introduction of modern and postmodern rhetoric in the RT, we see what became of rhetoric at the beginning of the 20th century in the United States. the RT says that rhetoric in American universities has been reduced to a few classes that have to do with writing and speech. I have witnessed this downsize in the availability of the rhetorical classes, because as I was looking into it as a major, I was surprised at how rhetoric is a mere option within the English major, among creative writing, and literature studies.
The RT goes on to explain how rhetoric has been reinvented as discourse though the course of the 20th century as a solution to issues that have been raised through traditional theory and meaning. This goes to show that rhetoric has evolved during modern times from what it used to be in classical times.

Thomas Sheridan

Thomas Sheridan was the son of a school master, whom he received his education from. He later became a stage actor who was very talented, but found his interest in the English language and endorsed the idea of establishing fixed rules for the usage of language. He eventually became more interested in language than acting and became a proselytizer for elocution. Sheridan went on to write many works regarding his expanding interest, including the Lectures on Elocution, which talk about both written and spoken language being symbols. He agrees with John Locke that "language is the medium of reason, so voice and gesture are too the natural language of the passions". Sheridan agrees with the first half of this statement, but felt like the second part of the statement needed to be elaborated upon. The idea for elaboration on the issues of voice and gesture are where Sheridan seemed to pick up his work, since many of his works went along with linguistic anxiety, which is the popular passion for speaking correctly. Here we are able to see just how he established fixed rules for the language, since they did not exist before and this may be why he thought that Locke needed to expand on this later part of that statement.

John Locke

John Locke influenced a change in the direction of rhetoric during the eighteenth century through his common experience and perception of common sense. He was a popular public figure because he was involved in government and well informed with the rationality of religion. Locke’s governmental involvement, with the documents that he wrote, greatly influenced the democratic government system that we have today in the United States because our constitution was modeled after one of his written documents.

Locke was a conspirer against the monarchy in England, and later wrote his works somewhat as a counter against the monarchy.

Locke believed that all we know are our own thoughts, but we can expand on what we know through words. For example, he believed that we can expand on our thoughts through reflection, which is our conveying of thoughts from one person to the next person. Locke is not saying that all we will ever know are our current thoughts and ideas, but that what we currently know are from our ever-changing thoughts and ideas, which are able to expand through either written or spoken words from others. This makes sense because we are always developing and building upon what we know by what others have written down before us. This is basically the whole idea behind education. 

Erasmus

Erasmus has an interesting history, as he was born the son of a priest, and expected to follow in the same footsteps. He grew up studying theology, but wished to escape this life to pursue humanist studies. However, his wishes to pursue other things were not fulfilled until later on in his life when the pope finally released him to remain in the world. I thought his history regarding religion is somewhat typical of clergymen of the time, since this was viewed by many as a mere profession, and often times one that was expected from sons who were not heirs. Few clergy men actually saw anything regarding Christianity, and few were even captured by it. Erasmus attended the very same school of theology that Martin Luther attended. Martin Luther was one of the few clergymen who experienced enlightenment from the Bible and did something with it, while Erasmus sort of seems to fall into the norm of the clergymen who were turned off by the deadness of the Catholic Church.

Although he was more interested in the humanities than religion, Erasmus learned Greek, he re-wrote the New Testament of the Bible into a textually accurate version of Greek, which is the language that the New Testament was originally in. His accomplishment in revising the New Testament encouraged the clergymen to learn more about the Church Fathers rather than just focusing on commentary to pass down to the clergymen in training. 

Renaissance Rhetoric

During the Renaissance, traditional establishments such as the Roman Catholic Church, as well as the way of thinking that accompanied such establishments. People began to look to science, and literature for answers and institutions that allowed more of the population to be educated were established. During this time, people began to look at the teachings of the ancient Greeks, and thus rhetoric became one of the things that was focused on during this time of scholarly expansion. During the Renaissance, it is hard to pinpoint the origin of rhetoric during this time, although it has been traced through certain scholars who have coupled rhetoric with philosophy and eloquence, rather than keeping keeping the scope of rhetoric focused on figures and tropes. Though rhetoric is hard to trace in the Renaissance by not being chronological or geographical, we do see some of the outcomes of rhetoric during this time. For example Ramus took the responsibility upon himself to simplify rhetoric. Rhetoric needed to be simplified due to what was going on with the times. Simplified rhetoric was necessary because more people were becoming literate, and they needed to be able to comprehend the rhetoric that they could now access. Also, in correlation with the printing press, books were becoming smaller because technology allowed for people to move more freely about the land and so books needed to be portable. The simplification of rhetoric allowed for the increasing literate population to bring books along with them.

Anonymous

The art of letter writing is explored in this piece by Anonymous. Ars dictaminis started out as any written text, but was later reduced to just letter writing. At first, letters were not taken so lightly as they are today since not everybody could read and write, and attaining literacy was expensive.  Cicero had listed six parts of speech that were later conformed to a model for writing letters. These six parts of speech consist of the exordium (introduction), narratio (background information), divisio (outline of the upcoming argument), confirmatio (argument or proof), refutatio (rebuttle), and peroratio (conclusion). After applying these six elements of speech to written text, specifically letters, the formula had to change because written text is entirely different than oration. For example, when applying these aspects of speech to letter writing, Alberic had to remove the one that focuses on argument because not all letters have an argument as much as they just relay facts or news from one person to the next. I  think that the formula for speech changed when it was applied to written letters because letters fulfill a different purpose than speech does.