Argument 1: a 1000 word, polished argument on an issue of cosequence, an issue of debate.
Enthymeme:
An enthymeme should include your claim and one reason.
Enthymeme Analysis:
1. Bring a polished and revised enthymeme, with an acceptable implicit assumption.
2. A summary of the major arguments on the issue, pro and con and anything in between.
3. Several sentences on the audience–what are the characteristics of people who fall on either side of the issue? What do they believe? What do they value?
Additional Notes for the Final Paper:
Choose a format–APA, MLA, etc. and stick to it. I don’t care what format you choose, as long as you follow it for formatting and citations.
Bring the peer reviewed draft with you and turn it in with the final paper.
On a page attached to the back of your paper, please include the final enthymeme you argued in the paper.
Grading
Grading will be done on a holistic scale as follows:
A: An A argument has a strong, well-developed enthymeme with an implicit assumption that would be acceptable to the audience. An A argument exhibits control over the movement of the argument and over the readers’ response. Careful attention is paid to medium and to using the most appropriate medium to reach the audience. An A argument will also demonstrate sophistication with language by assuring the readers’ attention to the most important concepts with appropriate stylistic emphasis. Specifically, an A argument will exhibit these virtues of style: correctness, clarity, appropriateness, emphasis, variety, and distinction. Finally, an A argument effectively deals with the counterargument (procatalepsis).
B: A B argument has a functioning enthymeme, but lacks control over reader response and movement of the argument. The reader-writer contract is either weak or is broken during the course of the paper. A B paper may also exhibit the following:
- A weak reason
- A weak major premise
- Insufficient consideration of terms or relations
- Some deficiency in managing information according to audience expectations
- Problems with clarity, cohesion, and emphasis
- Problem anticipating reader “buts” (procatalepsis)
C: A C argument has the rudiments of an argument, but is usually misconceived in audience or support. The following problems characterize a C paper:
- Argument in the implicit assumption
- Argument in the b/c clause
- Obscure terms
- Obscure relations
- Inappropriate re-definition
- Terms or relations reversed
- Formal principle minimally functional
- Lack of clarity, cohesion, and emphasis
D: A D paper has no argument present. It generally reflects genuine effort but has one or more of the following problems:
- No reader-writer contract
- No b/c clause (reason) offered
- Incomplete argument
- A definitional statement
- A policy statement (should)
- A value statement (is good, is bad)
- Four terms (no major premise; b/c clause does not address the claim)
