This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by FAHNESTOCK, J. Articles by SECOR, M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Stases in Scientific and Literary Argument

University of Maryland

MARIE SECOR

Pennsylvania State University

This article explores the usefulness of identifying the stasis of an argument, that is, whether it concerns an issue of fact, definition, cause, value, or action. The stasis of an argument can be seen as a component that has to be justified. An author must either assume or overtly appeal to the value of addressing a particular audience on a topic in a particular stasis. Once this principle of rhetorical analysis is in place, it is especially useful as an approach in the current enterprise of analyzing the rhetoric of the disciplines. While arguments in public forums naturally exploit the full stases, arguments in disciplinary contexts usually concern only the first two. "Exemplary" arguments in representative issues of Science and PMLA are then analyzed for their stasis and how they justify arguing over the issues they address. While science articles open and reopen questions of fact, classification, and cause while assuming the value of their enterprise, articles in literary criticism are problematic. They concern issues of value that are to a great extent already granted by their audience.

Written Communication, Vol. 5, No. 4, 427-443 (1988)
DOI: 10.1177/0741088388005004002


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. F. Casper In Praise of Carbon, In Praise of Science: The Epideictic Rhetoric of the 1996 Nobel Lectures in Chemistry Journal of Business and Technical Communication, July 1, 2007; 21(3): 303 - 323. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. E. Warren Literary Scholars Processing Poetry and Constructing Arguments Written Communication, April 1, 2006; 23(2): 202 - 226. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Wilder "The Rhetoric of Literary Criticism" Revisited: Mistaken Critics, Complex Contexts, and Social Justice Written Communication, January 1, 2005; 22(1): 76 - 119. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Wolfe A Method for Teaching Invention in the Gateway Literature Class Pedagogy, October 1, 2003; 3(3): 399 - 426. [PDF]

				L. Wilder "Get Comfortable With Uncertainty": A Study of the Conventional Values of Literary Analysis in an Undergraduate Literature Course Written Communication, January 1, 2002; 19(1): 175 - 221. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. THACKER and J. F. STRATMAN Transmuting Common Substances: The Cold Fusion Controversy and the Rhetoric of Science Journal of Business and Technical Communication, October 1, 1995; 9(4): 389 - 424. [Abstract]

				J. F. STRATMAN, C. BOYKIN, M. C. HOLMES, M. J. LAUFER, and M. BREEN Risk Communication, Metacommunication, and Rhetorical Stases in the Aspen-EPA Superfund Controversy Journal of Business and Technical Communication, January 1, 1995; 9(1): 5 - 41. [Abstract]

				S. P. MacDONALD Data-Driven and Conceptually Driven Academic Discourse Written Communication, October 1, 1989; 6(4): 411 - 435. [Abstract]