WHAT IS RHETORIC?
![Picture](/uploads/2/6/6/9/26696856/6262827.gif?879)
According to Aristotle, Rhetoric can be defined as “the ability, in each case, to see all of the available means of persuasion.”
WHAT IS AN ARGUMENT?
In “Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric with Readings,” an argument is defined as “a creative and productive activity that engages us to high levels of inquiry and critical thinking…” Arguments can be either explicit: meaning the argument “directly states its controversial claim and supports it with reasons and evidence,” or implicit: persuades its audience toward a certain point of view but instead is implied with the use of bumper stickers, billboards, posters, etc. (Ramage, Bean, and Johnson 3).
There are three defining features of an argument
There are three defining features of an argument
- An argument requires justification of claims. This may be the reasons, grounds, warrants, etc.
- An argument is both a process and a product. The process involves two or more people searching for the best solution to a problem, while the product is a person's contribution or opinion in an argument.
- Argument combines truth seeking and persuasion.
Rhetorical situation
- Writer
- Text
- Audience
- The authors of this Theoretical Critique are Lonn Lanza Kaduce from the University of Florida’s Department of Sociology and Criminology & Law, and Andrea Davis, a Ph.D. student of Sociology and Criminology & Law, also from the University of Florida.
- According to the University of Florida’s Law Scholarship Repository webpage, this theoretical critique was written as an extension of themes from sociologist Austin Turk’s theory of normative-legal conflict to the tragedy of Trayvon Martin and Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” laws. It analyzes how “displacing the “retreat” rule in threatening interactions outside the home with the “Stand Your Ground” legal norm authorizes confrontation rather than de-escalation and invites social norms regarding the racialization of crime and race-based norms of deference to enter the interaction and aggravate the probability of overt conflict.” (Kaduce and Davis, 2013)
- The audience of this theoretical critique was more than likely intended for those with a background in the fields of Sociology and Criminology & Law but is written in a text simple enough to be read and analyzed by students or adults interested either in the case of Trayvon Martin, or in the policies and fallacies of the “Stand Your Ground” Laws.
Kairos (Exigency)
Kairos comes from the Greek word "right time," "season," or "opportunity." In order to have a persuasive argument, one must consider an effective timing and a "tone and structure in right proportion or measure." (Ramage, Bean, and Johnson 61)
Why is the argument important now?
The arguments stated and implied in the analysis are important because the procedures and policies included in the “Stand Your Ground Law” are incredibly subjective and are assessed from the perspective of an individual. The arguments and situations presented illustrate just how much can go wrong because of a person’s interpretation of the law and that there is too much subjectivity in these laws for them to be part of the legal system. The argument is also important because the tragedy of Trayvon Martin, that Zimmerman used Stand Your Ground in defense of, included issues with race which are still a huge issue in this country.
What is the controversy or problem to be solved?
The issue with the “Stand Your Ground” laws according to Kanduce and Davis is that Stand Your Ground gives imprecise status to citizens where features of threat are more subjective which will increase overt conflict between parties, especially in cross-race interactions. (Kaduce and Davis, 2013) Kaduce and Davis argue that the Martin case will not be an isolated tragedy and if policies and practices of the law are not reanalyzed and reconsidered, “”Stand Your Ground” will “…increase the rate of conflict over and beyond that produced by the retreat rule.” (Kaduce and Davis, 2013) As in the case of Trayvon Martin, Zimmerman's feeling of being "threatened" is subjective and because there was the racial factor of Trayvon being a black youth, "Stand Your Ground" came under great scrutiny and became a controversy in the United States.
Why is the argument important now?
The arguments stated and implied in the analysis are important because the procedures and policies included in the “Stand Your Ground Law” are incredibly subjective and are assessed from the perspective of an individual. The arguments and situations presented illustrate just how much can go wrong because of a person’s interpretation of the law and that there is too much subjectivity in these laws for them to be part of the legal system. The argument is also important because the tragedy of Trayvon Martin, that Zimmerman used Stand Your Ground in defense of, included issues with race which are still a huge issue in this country.
What is the controversy or problem to be solved?
The issue with the “Stand Your Ground” laws according to Kanduce and Davis is that Stand Your Ground gives imprecise status to citizens where features of threat are more subjective which will increase overt conflict between parties, especially in cross-race interactions. (Kaduce and Davis, 2013) Kaduce and Davis argue that the Martin case will not be an isolated tragedy and if policies and practices of the law are not reanalyzed and reconsidered, “”Stand Your Ground” will “…increase the rate of conflict over and beyond that produced by the retreat rule.” (Kaduce and Davis, 2013) As in the case of Trayvon Martin, Zimmerman's feeling of being "threatened" is subjective and because there was the racial factor of Trayvon being a black youth, "Stand Your Ground" came under great scrutiny and became a controversy in the United States.