WRT 381 Advanced Analytic and Argumentative Writing

Prof. Robert Kaplan

Student: Fabio Santiago
Word
Now, the framers of the current
treatises on rhetoric have
constructed but a small portion
of that art. The modes of
persuasion are the only true
constituents of the art:
everything else is merely
accessory. These writers,
however, say nothing about
enthymemes, which are the
substance of rhetorical
persuasion
In a political debate the man
who is forming a judgment is
making a decision about his own
vital interests. There is no need,
therefore, to prove anything
except that the facts are what the
supporter of a measure
maintains they are. In forensic
oratory this is not enough; to
conciliate the listener is what
pays here.

The enthymeme is a sort of

syllogism, and the consideration
of syllogisms of all kinds,
without distinction, is the
business of dialectic, either of
dialectic as a whole or of one of
its branches

Definition
1. Rhetoric. After Aristotle's
use: An argument based on
merely probable grounds; a
rhetorical argument as
distinguished from a
demonstrative one. Obs.

6a. trans. To gain over in

feeling; to overcome the
distrust or hostility of, by
soothing and pacifying
means; to induce friendly
and kindly feelings in; to
soothe, placate, pacify.
Also absol.

1a. Logic. An argument

expressed or claimed to
be expressible in the form
of two propositions called
the premisses, containing
a common or middle
term, with a third
proposition called the
conclusion, resulting
necessarily from the
other two.
Example: Omne animal
est substantia, omnis
homo est animal,

Rewrite
The current treatises on rhetoric
only cover a small part of that
art because writers have failed
to produce detailed descriptions
of its core constituents: the
modes of persuasion. In those
treatises, for instance, they do
not discuss arguments based on
merely probable grounds, which
are the centerpiece of the art of
rhetorical persuasion.
In a political debate, only the
facts presented by the supporter
of a measure are necessary and
there is no need to additional
proofs. This happens because
judgments are formed based on
his/her personal interests and
goals. On the other hand,
forensic oratory involves more
than factual evidence, it
demands the speaker to gain
over the audience in order to
overcome any felling of distrust
or hostility hold by listerners.
The enthymeme is a kind of
syllogism - two logical
propositions sharing a common
term which generate a third
conclusive proposition.
Different types of syllogism are
explored in the field of Dialetics
as a whole or in one its
subfields.

ergo omnis homo est

substantia

WRT 381 Advanced Analytic and Argumentative Writing

Prof. Robert Kaplan
Student: Fabio Santiago

1) According to Aristotle, what is the purpose of rhetoric? 2) What is the relationship between
rhetoric and argument?
In general terms, Aristotle explains that rhetoric and dialectic are concerned with the discussion of
statements, an inherent activity of the humankind. In a court of law, for instance, lawyers employ
several means of persuasion in order to gain the trust of the audience and to affiliate with them by
sharing common views about a specific social situation. They try to create certain emotional
responses in the audience, they build through discourse a positive face for themselves or they employ
logical reasoning to support their claims. However, Aristotle specifies that rhetorics main purpose is
to describe the main modes of persuasion available to speakers. Rhetoric practice, therefore, is a form
of demonstration in which a speaker makes use of a set of arguments, based on probability and the
application of logical principles, in order to defend the validity of a claim.

WRT 381 Advanced Analytic and Argumentative Writing

Prof. Robert Kaplan
Student: Fabio Santiago

Word

Definition
6. The bringing forward,

With regard to the persuasion

achieved by proof or
apparent proof: just as in
dialectic there is induction
on the one hand and
syllogism or apparent
syllogism on the other, so it
is in rhetoric.

adducing, or enumerating of a
number of separate facts,
particulars, etc., esp. for the
purpose of proving a general
statement.
7a. The process of inferring a
general law or principle from
the observation of particular
instances (opposed
to deduction n., q.v.)

Rewrite
In relation to proof or apparent
proof as the means for
achieving persuasion, dialectic
is concerned with the process of
inferring a general law or
principle from the observation
of particular instances, while
rhetoric relates to the process of
probing the validity of a claim
based on a sequence of
premises.

WRT 381 Advanced Analytic and Argumentative Writing

Prof. Robert Kaplan
Student: Fabio Santiago

Word
The political orator aims at
establishing the expediency or
the harmfulness of a proposed
course of action; (...).

Definition

Rewrite

WRT 381 Advanced Analytic and Argumentative Writing

Prof. Robert Kaplan
Student: Fabio Santiago

1) In your own words, how does Aristotle describe the various modes of persuasion?
According to Aristotle, there are three kinds of general modes of persuasion. The first
kind has to do with the speakers character and the ways it helps him to gain credibility from
his/her audience. A speaker can employ several strategies to establish a positive relationship with
his/her audience and increase his/her level of persuasiveness such as: 1) emphasizing his/her
social status and expertise regarding a specific subject-matter; 2) making use of proper style of
language and vocabulary according to the specific situation and; 3) constructing oneself as fair
and unbiased.
The second kind is concerned with putting the audience into a certain frame of mind, in
other words, appealing to emotions and feelings in order to sensitize the audience about a
particular point of view and, as a consequence, influence on their judgment. In order to invoke
different feelings in the audience (such as anger, pity, compassion, etc.) and manipulate its
actions, a speaker can, for instance, tell a sad story in an emotional tone and create several
implied meanings through discourse.
The third kind of mode of persuasion is related to the process of using language and
reasoning effectively in order to persuade an audience. It is an appeal to the intellect and involves
the use of logical arguments, facts, propositions, probabilities, analogies, meanings relations,
inductive and deductive reasoning by a speaker as means to support a claim. For instance, two
different rationales can be used to explain the formation of gay communities in the main
capitals of the U.S during the 70s. One possible explanation, based on deduction reasoning, is

that discourses from the media, the sexual revolution movement and the disco culture from the
70s played a very important role in the formation of a gay identity. On the other hand, another
possible explanation, based on deductive reasoning, is that economic factors, such as the
decentralization of the nuclear family as a unit of production, led to the formation of an urban
gay culture. Finally, a third rationale takes the two perspectives as a dialectic process in which
both material, economic factors and ideologies and representations were intertwined for the
shaping of a social hegemonic gay identity.

2) What are the various types of proof?

In Rhetoric, persuasion by proof can be achieved by the use of examples, a number of
similar cases used to support a claim, or enthymemes, a small number of propositions, usually
already know by the audience, which are used to support an argument. Examples and
enthymemes are the counterpart of induction and syllogism, which are concepts from Dialectics.
In the second chapter of Ars Retorica, Aristotle points out two main types of proofs: fallible
proofs and infallible, complete proofs. A proof is fallible when an argument can be refuted, even
though the proposition that forms it is true. For example, the argument The fact that my wife is
a good cook and caring mother means that all women are women are good cooks and caring
mothers is composed by two propositions that do not form a syllogism because the second
propositions is refutable. On the other hand, the argument She has got a college scholarship
means that she was probably a good student in High School is true, irrefutable since college
scholarships are generally granted to students with good/excellent records in High School.

WRT 381 Advanced Analytic and Argumentative Writing

Prof. Robert Kaplan
Student: Fabio Santiago

1) What, according to Aristotle, are the three types of rhetoric? Political, forensic (judicial)
and cerimonial (epideictic).
2) What are the aims of each of those rhetorical types?

3) In your own words, what, according to Bitzer, is the rhetorical situation?

4) What do you see as the relationship between the Aristotle readings we have done to date
and Bitzers article?

WRT 381 Advanced Analytic and Argumentative Writing

Prof. Robert Kaplan
Student: Fabio Santiago

PROJECT OUTLINE

An intersectional analysis of discourses of masculinity and same-sex desire in Brazil

In my project, I investigate the relationship between masculinity and same-sex desire in

Brazil. Traditional conceptions of masculinity tend to conceive it as an essential, natural,
biological characteristic possessed by every male-sexed individual. In a binary gender order, men
are the opposite of women: they are naturally expected to be competitive, aggressive and
breadwinners while women are supposed to be delicate, nurturing and good housewives.
However, the emergence of Feminism in the 60s, which claimed equal rights between men and
women, posed several challenges to the secure role of a masculine social identity in that order.
Those challenges served to reveal that masculinity, as an expression of gender norms, is a social
construction. As a consequence, there was a need to theorize masculinity as an outcome of social
practices in different institutional contexts (such as workplace, family, school, church, etc.).
Early studies on masculinity focused on a specific type of hegemonic masculinity
(white, middle class, straight, white-collar). Later on, scholars acknowledged that despite the
existence of an ideal of masculinity associated with power and privilege, masculinity should be
approached as a plural, dynamic and socially-situated concept. Multiple masculinities therefore
are produced by the intersection of other social markers of identity than gender such as
sexuality, race, class, nationality, etc. For instance, as a response to the gay liberation movement
in the early 70s, there was the emergence of the gay clone masculinity, a hyperbolic emulation

of straight male gender norms. In addition, a clone masculinity was not only a parody of the
male gender, but also an outcome of a specific historical moment, which involved a movement of
large groups of people across the U.S. and the formation of communities in urban areas
(especially New York and San Francisco) based on same-sex desire.
Currently, the clone culture, as a manifestation of identity politics has been replaced
by a queer politics and theory expressed as a radical critique of identity as a form of
normativity regarding gender and sexuality. Nowadays, labelling oneself gay has been
considered a choice of lifestyle, not an essential feature of ones identity. Many men who have
sex with other men refuse to label themselves as gays and reproduce heterosexuality through
their public performances of masculinity.
Studies on gay masculinities are very recent in Brazil and have focused on issues
concerning the general LGBT community. Still, those studies have failed to address the several
tensions and contradictions of masculinity and its intersection with same-sex desire, social class
and race. For such reasons, in this project, I will attempt to answer the following research
questions:

What discourses of masculinity are produced by Brazilian queer men?

In which ways do conceptions of masculinity influence on the sexuality of Brazilian

men?

How do social and economic variables (e.g. educational level, social class, religion,
family relationships) influence on the experience of a queer masculinity?