Enthymemes Connect Reasons to Conclusions, and Build Bigger, Better Papers

Enthymemes? What the what?

The American English Dictionary defines an enthymeme as

"an argument in which one premise is not explicitly stated."

In other words: Because A = B, and B = C, then it follows that A also = C.

Even Wikipedia knows all about enthymemes and offers an example:

“Socrates is mortal because he's human.”
 

The complete formal syllogism (or enthymeme) in the classic is as follows:

A. All humans are mortal. (major premise = assumed);

B. Socrates is human. (minor premise = stated);

C. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. (conclusion = stated)

The word enthymeme was used by the Greek philosopher Aristotle when, in his treatise on rhetoric, he needed to describe how reasoning works informally in our everyday arguments where we do not necessarily use the mathematically rigid forms of logic.

In Greek, the term combines en = into, and thymos = soul, to suggest the way that reasoned language is able to produce belief. Aristotle called the enthymeme the “body (or substance) of proof.”

The relationship created between a reason and a conclusion is not self-contained. It makes implicit reference to other ideas that help to bind the reason to the conclusion, making it seem to follow.

Here is an example of enthymemes used in an actual argument, in a brief passage from Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail:

“A law is unjust if it is inflicted on a minority that, as a result of being denied the right to vote, had no part in enacting or devising the law. Who can say that the legislature of Alabama, which set up the state’s segregation laws, was democratically elected? Throughout Alabama all sorts of devious methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters, and there are some counties in which, even though Negroes constitute a majority of the population, not a single Negro is registered. Can any law enacted under such circumstances be considered democratically structured?”

Conclusion: Alabama’s segregation laws are unjust.

Reason: Those laws were inflicted on a minority that had no role in enacting them.

Assumption: Any law that is inflicted on a minority that had no role in enacting it is an unjust law.

The reason here is itself the conclusion of another enthymeme:

Conclusion: African Americans had no role in enacting Alabama’s segregation laws.

Reason: African Americans were prevented from voting for the state legislature.

Assumption: Anyone prevented from voting for the legislature has no role in enacting laws passed by that legislature.

In other words: because A = B, and B = C, therefore A = C.

Your thesis statement (disguised as an enthymeme) begins to operate like so:

Because 'A' is true, therefore 'B' and 'C' are also true.

Question: “How do enthymemes help me build bigger, better papers?”

Answer: Enthymemes help to build a bigger, beefier thesis statement that also helps you structure your paper. (For you vegans out there, this is only a metaphor.)
The paper can now be written with the enthymeme in the place of a thesis statement. The next few paragraphs will flow more easily with that bigger, better, more forceful powerhouse (i.e., the enthymeme) on your side.

Remember: Because A = B, and B = C, therefore A = C.



*To pronounce the word, "enthymeme," go here: http://youtu.be/C0tMcoMleZg

The Fact of the Matter is....

...that you need an argument.

The word argument gives me a serious case of the heebie jeebies.  I was raised in an old fashioned home where we were taught never ever to argue.  Instead, we were told to smile politely and do as we were told,  even if we disagreed. If we disagreed, we were grounded.  Forever.  Actually, I think I still might be grounded for the great Smurfette fiasco of 1984...

Yes, my parents did end up raising extremely polite children, but they also ended up with children who are terrified of debating and arguing - which makes me wonder if I should perhaps be changing my major from English to basket weaving.

Because when doing many types of communicating, it is imperative that you have an argument. Otherwise you are just talking to talk, or writing to write and that makes me think of those evil Furbee dolls that have made a recent comeback.  Those things just talk and talk and talk. My little sister received one for Christmas back in the late 90s, and I think it's still talking, about what I'm not sure: moral of the story - don't be a Furbee!

But I digress.

Woe betide the student who writes a paper lacking an argument. Many "add comment" icons will be clicked by professors of all disciplines, and red marks will be made at the end of an introduction that is missing an argument or boasts a weak argument.

I will admit that when I first started writing I did not understand why an argument was necessary.  I thought, "Well, I just have this assignment to write...and information to give.  That's all I need."

Silly, silly, silly.

And probably a reason why I struggled reaching those 5-7 page length requirements.  'Cause it turns out that if you have a strong argument, thus a strong thesis statement, page length requirements are a walk in the park.

No foolin'.

This past semester I had the wonderful, and I truly mean that, opportunity to teach an Enlish 101 composition course at a local community college.  What troubled most of my students at the beginning of the semester was reaching those 4-6 pages I was forcing them to write (it was for their own good!).  Now I have been writing 16-20 page papers for quite awhile, so I couldn't help but laugh a little (inwardly of course) about the cries of despair my students were voicing over the page length requirement.

But I quickly stopped that inward giggle when I saw their first papers, and I understood exactly what the problem was.

They were writing their papers based on a simple fact, not an argument.

In the first unit my students were assigned a paper that had them choose an old Grimm's Fairy tale, analyze it, and then inform their audience whether the story was a positive moral tale for youth or one that should be quickly shooed back into the dark ages.

Here are some example thesis statements I saw in their papers:

• Snow White is a classic fairy tale, but it has negative themes.
• Hansel and Gretel is a sad story where children are abandoned and hope is lost.

What is wrong with those statements? Well, for starters, one of them is a total slam on Hansel and Gretel...

In all seriousness, each of these statements are simply facts.

Fact: Snow White is definitely a classic.  And indeed there are negative themes in that story (what with the Prince kissing the dead girl and all...).

Fact: Hansel and Gretel are definitely abandoned. There exists a feeling of hopelessness in that story (unless you think finding a candy house is hopeful...and you might have a solid good point there).

Although these are interesting facts, it would be very hard to write a good 4-6 page paper using these as thesis statements.  After all, your thesis statement is your bottom line and also your jumping off point.  Once you have a solid thesis statement, things fall into place much more easily. And a thesis statement is basically a fancy group of words that describe your very important argument.

The word 'argument', as defined by the OED, means "A statement or fact advanced for the purpose of influencing the mind" ('argument', n).

Did you see that?  A fact that has been advanced. So basically in order to build a solid argument, you need to unpack that fact.

And that is what I helped my students to do.

What we started out doing was writing as many facts down about the chosen fairy tales as we could.

The student who had chosen Snow White and had said that it had negative themes ended up writing a list like this:

Wicked Step-mother = a bad stereotype
Beauty is emphasized as being what makes a person important
Necrophilia
Ostricization of the other
Strong Masculine themes abound - Prince kisses Snow and she awakes = A man saves the day

After reading through that list, I can never read or watch Snow White with whimsy again.  Now it has become a very depressing and dark tale for me.  And that is because my student combined all of those facts into a strong argument (and then a very strong paper).

Here is what she came up with:

Snow White, although considered a classic fairy tale and immortalized by Disney, is not the happy romantic tale everyone thinks it is and the story itself includes themes of banishment, discourages feminism, and includes a stereo-typical evil step-mother.  Although often read to children as a heart warming romantic story, Snow White instead impacts children negatively.

No, it's not perfect.  But I reckon it is a stronger argument than what she had written before, and when she revised her paper (because revision is cool, yo!) she not only reached her page limit...but this time while reading her paper I never once felt as if she was padding it to get to the 4-6.  She produced a solid, well written, and well organized paper.

So, from then on a lot of my students started writing fact sheets about their chosen topic. After those students, who were all so totally rad, had written down a bunch of facts they would string them together to form an argument.

If you are like me and the word argument sends you into fits of worry and nail biting, simply think of it as it is defined "a statement or fact advanced."  Unpack those facts and ask them to stay a while. Hang out with them a bit and see what you come up with.

Then put that strong argument together and remember that although arguing often has negative connotations, it shouldn't. It is necessary. Because your argument is what you think, and what you think is important...right?  Right.

Arguments are necessary.

So just smile and do it politely (or my dad is gonna ground you).

Beware of Fallacies

Recently, you might have noticed that the interruptions occurring during your favorite television shows have changed. Sure, the usual suspects still line up: The Honda Accord with improved fuel efficiency, the novel combination flavor of Doritos (surf and turf, maybe), the fast-food/comic book movie tie-in, the reptile (or is it an amphibian?) pitching car insurance.

Squeezed in between these bookends of capitalism are the works of our beloved democracy. In 2012 the candidates are Barack Obama and Mitt Romney.

I'll assume you know each man's party affiliation. Political parties spend a lot of money and a lot of time developing TV commercials. Not surprisingly, after viewing a few of these commercials, the candidates seem almost trustworthy.

As sophisticated consumers, we've come to expect a hamburger at McDonald's will look different in an advertisement than it will upon consumption; likewise, as sophisticated citizens of the United States of America, we've come to regard the promises and evidences contained in political advertisements with an air of skepticism.

To some citizens, voting is a sacred obligation requiring sincere deliberation. Mass media advertisements do not convey the kind of information that allows a rational person to sincerely deliberate, thus the citizens of this country require other forums for political expression. One of the other forums of political expression is debate.

So far, during this election cycle, there have been two presidential debates. Maybe you've watched one in its entirety; maybe you only seen a couple of highlights, but however extensive your knowledge of the debates might be, perhaps you've occasionally said to yourself: That seems wrong.

In the words of twentieth century polymath and teacher Robert J. Gula, "It's frustrating to know in your heart that what you've just heard is nonsense but not to be able to pinpoint why it is nonsense" (1).

To help students and non-students with their ability to pinpoint why an argument is nonsense, Gula wrote a book entitled Nonsense: Red Herrings Straw Men Sacred Cows: How We Abuse Logic in Our Everyday Language. One way to decide whether the arguments a politician uses in a debate really are wrong is to check them for fallacies. Checking arguments for fallacies isn't something that we should only do when politicians are running for office. Instead, we should always be on the look out for fallacious reasoning
--not just in other people's arguments but also in our own.

The first thing to be aware of when thinking about fallacies? There are a lot of them.

It is not easy to construct a non-trivial argument that avoids any fallacious reasoning, but it isn't impossible. For this post, I will, drawing on Gula's book, give an introduction of ad hominem arguments.

Because ad hominem arguments focus on criticizing the person and not on criticizing the person's argument, all ad hominem arguments are fallacious, that is, they do not provide a good reason to believe that some claim is true or false.

In chapter six of Nonsense, Gula gives an overview of ad hominem arguments, three of which I'll specifically address in this blog. They are:
1. Abusive ad hominem
2. Circumstantial ad hominem
3. Guilt by association

To illustrate (1) let's look at the following hypothetical exchange:
Jamie: "Candidate X's conclusion about raising taxes is false."
Leslie:"Why?"
Jaime: "Because candidate X got into a bar fight last week."

Just because a candidate for political office gets into a bar fight, that doesn't mean his conclusion about raising taxes is false. There is a difference between a person's argument and a person's behavior. Attacking a person's behavior or their character does not affect the argument he presents. An evil person guilty of the most despicable abomination can still present a strong argument. Just imagine an evil person saying the following:
Premise: "All dogs are mammals."
Premise: "All mammals are vertebrates."
Conclusion: "Therefore, all dogs are vertebrates."

Does this argument seem sound to you? It does to me. It wouldn't matter how evil the person was, if he presented this argument, it would be sound.

To illustrate (2) let's look at the following hypothetical exchange:
Jamie: "Candidate X's proposal should be rejected."
Leslie: "Why? It seems like the park does need new sidewalks."
Jamie: "Because candidate X's brother owns a concrete company. The proposal will benefit him."

Just because a candidate's brother will profit from a proposal that doesn't necessarily mean that the proposal should be rejected.

Now, there might be good reasons to reject the proposal. If, for example, the candidate's brother submitted a bid that was higher than every other submitted bid, the proposal could be properly rejected on those grounds. If the candidate's brother submitted a bid that was competitive in price but non-competitive in predicated time-of-completion, say, all the other company's promise to complete the work by the end of March while the candidate's brother promises to complete the work by the end of April, then the proposal could be properly rejected.

The proposal should be examined closely, irrespective of who will benefit financially. If the proposal is deemed to be good for the community, then the fact that the candidate's brother will be the one benefiting financially is irrelevant.

To illustrate (3) let's look at the following hypothetical exchange:
Jaime: "I'm not voting for candidate X."
Leslie: "Why?"
Jaime: "Because candidate X is member of the same fraternity that just got busted for cheating on an exam."

Just because a candidate is a member of a fraternity that committed an immoral act does not mean that the candidate's arguments are false. The candidate can have friends, family members, and associates who believe things that he himself rejects.

Just because a candidate's brother believes that the earth is flat, and just because a candidate has dinner with his brother every Sunday does not mean that the candidate himself believes that the earth is flat. The candidate's beliefs should be determined and assessed based only on the candidate himself. 

When we write a paper for a class, especially a paper that requires us to make an argument, we need to make sure that we are focusing on what is relevant. You can not affect the truth or falsity of a premise or a conclusion by attacking the premise's or conclusion's source. The good news is that the arguments that you make are also protected from ad hominem attacks.

If someone criticizes you, your argument is unaffected. And isn't that a relief? 

A Message from the Ghost of Employment Future

Many of you will find yourselves graduating this semester and likely on the long arduous search for work. Some may have jobs that you held during the semesters while others might’ve focused solely on academics in lieu of a steady paycheck. Whatever the case, once you get your fancy-shmancy degree, you’re going to have to make it look like you’re a pro. I mean, you are a pro, but you gotta make them believe it. Your prospective employers.

Yeah, you got some wicked awesome grades. 3.5 GPA? Not everybody can boast that. Heck, it might even be just what your employer’s looking for. Your resume? It was pretty boss. It could just snag you that job.

But wait. I can see it now:

Mr. Future-Boss is thumbing through his latest wave of applications to position of Senior Fancy-Pants. He’s looking for a particular background with a particular set of skills, and, by George, you have all those particulars down like you’ve planned it all these years.

But you know what? He never sees your application. In fact, he tosses in the “Send to Incinerator” bin, the contents of which will be sent immediately to the incinerator where it will be converted into ashes and then returned to Mr. Future-Boss’s office where Mr. Future-Boss and his assistant will sip ginger ale and dance on the ashes.

I’ll answer your first question: I don’t know what kind of dance they’re doing, but if I had to guess I’d say the Charleston. To respond to your second query, I’d have to say that the reason why it got sent to the incinerator was because missing a key element. Not a crisp hundred-dollar bill paperclipped to the back of your application, but instead a cover letter.

Now I know nobody writes letters anymore except foppish dukes in powdered wigs, but that’s why this is called a cover letter. You don’t need to write a letter, but you sure as heck need a cover letter.

What does that entail? Well according to the Purdue OWL, you want to begin with a little bit of this:

• State the university you attend, your major, and what position you are applying for (if you are a student).
• Mention where you heard about the job.
• Mention the name of a professor or other contact who has a positive connection with the company.
• Bring up any previous conversations you have had with your reader (i.e., at a job fair).

Intros consist of some name dropping and fond reminiscence, or at least pretend fond reminiscence. Name dropping shows how connected you are and how enthusiastic you might be to get this job. Word of the wise: DO NOT GET WORDY. You want to be concise, to the point. It's fast paced world we live in folks and you don't want to get bogged down by wordy introductions and poorly-paced lead-ins that involve unnecessary information and--

Next, you want to kick it up a notch in the body, or the argument. This isn't where you argue that the one time you met your employer he was wearing two different color socks (it was a bad day for Mr. Future-Boss), but rather why you deserve this job, nay, why they deserve you. You're going to want to mention a few of these:

• Special projects
• Awards
• Accomplishments

Talk yourself up. Big time. But don't lie or exaggerate. Mr. Future-Boss might have a pretty good idea whether or not you're in Mensa because he's the secretary at their meetings. He takes darn good attendance.

Feel ready to finish? Keep these things in mind:

• Close with a strong reminder of why you are a good match for the job position and the organization.
• Request an interview in some way.
• Provide contact information.
• Thank them!
• Sign your name and print it underneath.

Mr. Future-Boss has what they call the short-term memory loss. He swears he's like Guy Pearce in Memento, but his assistant (and most people know better). Regardless, he's going to forget why you're a top candidate for Senior Fancy-Pants after he gets done reading the body. You also want to talk to him in the future--you know, to convince him further why you'd be the best Senior Fancy-Pants to come through in the last twenty years. You'll want to leave your name, number, and address in case he wants to don his powdered wig and write you back, and while you're at it sign the bottom so he can see how good of penmanship you have. Or see how good the handwriting is of your close friend who has good handwriting. Again, he might forget your name so a signature should remind him of it.

And thank him because Mr. Future-Boss is a busy man with little time to dawdle.

Need some visuals? Check 'em.

Other Types of Research

Books, journal articles and online databases are the tools that we normally use when doing research. However, there are many other sources of information that can be useful to anyone writing a paper. Here are just a few other options that can be considered.

One lost art of research is using actual hard copies of newspapers as a source for a paper. When I was speaking with a history major, she reminisced on the days that she was stuck in the library sifting through old newspaper articles because they alone provided the information that was useful in her paper. Somehow this form of research has become somewhat of a history artifact in and of itself.

If you’re an education major observing can provide insight when reflecting on strategies that have been learned in the classroom setting. Sitting in on professional meeting can also benefit business majors, administration majors or anyone involved in professional major. When observing, make sure to always take notes, not only on the setting and reactions of those involved in your observation but also on your reactions to the experience.

Along these same lines, interviewing someone with experience within your discipline can provide inside information and expertise. Like observing in a professional setting, conducting an interview should be well planned and executed in a professional manner. When compiling questions to ask, make sure they are leading to the points that you are trying to gain from the encounter. Also be sure to include questions that are also open ended, which can lead to more explanation or deeper conversations. As always, make sure to take detailed notes while conducting the interview. Then when compiling all of your information, make sure to reflect on what you’ve learned and how using the interview is beneficial to your project.

Using questionnaires or surveys can also provide detailed information that will be useful to a paper or project. The focus and design of a survey will depend on what information you’re trying to gather, as well as the characteristics of the group you are surveying. This form of research can provide a wide range of information and could be very useful when drafting a paper based on a gap of information that you’re trying to address.

Though these aren’t the only other forms of research besides books and journal articles, they can provide information research avenues for many projects and your professional development.

What We Talk About When We Talk About Audience

"Filmed before a live studio audience." It's a phrase that introduced several sitcoms during the 1980's and '90's. The audience sitting in the sound stage of Cheers watched as the romantic tension unfolded between Ted Danson and Kirstie Alley or they listen to the philosophies of the beer-guzzling patrons of the Boston bar. The audience laughed when Cliff made a joke or childishly ooooo-ed when Sam and Rebecca exchanged flirtatious banter. The audience listened; the audience responded.

As writers, we have the responsibility to take note of the audience. The misconception for most students is that the only audience is their instructor. It's unsurprising, considering the main objective for the paper composer is not a clear concise paper, only one that provides a sufficient grade. It's difficult not to fall into that trap; we wish to appease the instructor so we write what he or she would like, or at least what we think he or she would like.

In truth, we never know what he or she would like for sure, save for the skeletal prescription offered by some syllabuses and writing assignment prompts, but sadly we limit ourselves to those parameters. While, yes, it is absolutely necessary to follow the instructions of a syllabus or prompt (there's more help there than you might think), we should strive to go a step further when writing a paper. We should think beyond the person at the podium and who else might read this. The initial thought may be that there is no one else who might read this, but that couldn't be further from the truth. A thoughtful paper will often be made an example for future writers, while the paper composed with less concerted effort will be forgotten or, in the rare worst case scenario, be made a cautionary example.

The easiest way to this may be to picture the reader before we begin composing, specifically when we're brainstorming ideas. If our first thought is our instructor, we must dash that image right out and start from scratch. Our audience will be dependent on our discipline--an economics paper will be intended for fellow economists, while a literary paper will be written with literature specialists in mind. While making such associations might be easy enough, the next part is easier said than done: we must think of a topic that will interest a large body of readers. While it will require more effort on our part, treating a paper less like an assignment and more like a work to be read by more than just our instructor will put us in a mindset for researching more and developing an unique and thoughtful argument about which to write.

Standards and Expectations from Engaged Writers, Dynamic Disciplines

In a book that was published in 2006 titled Engaged Writers, Dynamic Disciplines: Research on the Academic Writing Life, Chris Thaiss and Terry Myers Zawacki present, as the back cover relates, the conclusions of a "four-year, crossdisciplinary study of faculty and students from a wide range of majors" that "demonstrate[s] that academic disciplines are dynamic spaces that accommodate a variety of alternative styles and visions."

While Thaiss and Myers Zawacki offer a detailed portrait of the ways writing takes place in diverse majors, they begin their book with three core principles that might help students understand where professors are coming from. In this post I thought I'd present the three principles for reflection and discussion.

Thaiss and Myers Zawacki claim that "regardless of differences among disciplines and individual teachers" (5) professors expect:

1. "Clear evidence in writing that the writer(s) have been persistent, open-minded, and disciplined in study" (5).
2. "The dominance of reason over emotions or sensual perception" (5).
3. "An imagined reader who is coolly rational, reading for information, and intending to formulate a reasoned response" (7).

The first principle relates to how college classes depend on strong reading and careful thinking. As the authors relate, "academics are invariably harsh toward any student or scholar who hasn't done the background reading, who isn't prepared to talk formally or off the cuff about the subject of the writing, and whose writing doesn't show careful attention to the objects of study and reflective thought about them" (5).

In other words, students or scholars need to show that they know the conversations going on in that discipline or subject, and they need take time to distill what it means to them through discussion, writing papers, WebCT posts, etc.

What the second principle connects to, for me at least, is that while students may have strong opinions, they also must support those ideas with evidence, reasoning, examples, and details that make sense to a wider audience. While the authors' own study details a Professor of Nursing who promotes the use of emotions and experiences as a means to understand the challenges of the profession, even then a writer is expected to be "a careful, fair student and analyst of competing positions" (6), which also connects to how the authors detail principle 3 in terms that "all academic writing is 'argumentative' in its perception of a reader who may object or disagree" since "the writer's effort to anticipate and allay these potential objections is also part of a broadly 'argumentative' ethos" (7).

So with all that information related above, what do you think based on your own careful reading and critical thinking? [see principle 1]

Do these principles seem true to you based on your experience as a student and/or a professor?