C1: Persuasion in Action
Due: Tuesday, 13 September, class

Bring in some example of an attempt at persuasion, i.e., an example of rhetoric in everyday life. It could be an advertisement, a speech, something a friend said, a newspaper article, part of a lecture, an image, etc. What distinguishes this attempt to persuade from other objects that share the same medium? (For example, what makes this image/text persuasive while some other images/texts serve a non-persuasive end?) How does it go about its attempt at persuasion? To what extent does it succeed? What difference does its medium make? Does it exert some influence or have some effect that is not a matter of persuasion? The idea is not to answer each of these questions, but to approach your example critically, to have thought about what it means that this thing is (trying to be) a persuasive thing. Be prepared to present your example and analysis of it to the class, given about two minutes.


A1: Rhetoric and Truth
Due: Friday, 16 September, noon (draft)
Due: Thursday, 29 September, beginning of class (revision)

The first essay asks you to think critically about rhetoric and its relationship to truth. You must address some debatable or controversial aspect of rhetoric’s relationship to truth. Many good essays are organized around a central claim, an argument in favor of a particular position. You may choose to write such an essay, attempting to persuade your reader of the correctness of your position. But the most persuasive arguments are those that carefully consider and respond to the most compelling arguments in opposition to their position. Thus, your essay should above all explore your subject matter critically, considering the issue from all sides rather than ignoring those perspectives that conflict with your central claim.

Within the general subject matter of rhetoric and truth, you are free to choose any topic. You might consider the relationship between rhetoric and honesty. You might ask whether rhetoric has any influence over truth, or whether the influence only goes the other direction. Is a speaker who has truth on her side necessarily better off rhetorically than one who speaks against the truth? Under what circumstances is it rhetorically effective to bend the truth, and how should this be done? This short list only begins to suggest topics you could consider. If you have any questions about the legitimacy of your topic, please ask the professor.

Whatever topic you choose, it will likely be important to offer thoughtful analysis of the meanings of your central terms. In fact, Plato suggests that such definitional work is the bulk of any critical argument. Dictionary definitions are usually unhelpful; rather, you should draw upon your own intuitions and the ideas of experts to develop for your reader a sense of what, for example, truth is.

Sources: This is not primarily a research paper, and you should not devote many words to explicating the ideas or opinions of others. The most difficult aspect of this assignment is finding something worth saying, something that a reader will find challenging and engaging. Nevertheless, it is often very helpful to both reader and writer to engage with the written ideas and opinions of others who address related subject matters. On rhetoric and truth, Plato’s two dialogs, Phaedrus and Gorgias are both relevant, as is Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Herrick’s text book, recommended for this class, also contains useful thinking, and most any book on rhetoric will likely take up the question of rhetoric’s relationship to truth. Feel free to use these sources in your essay, but bear in mind that your job is to demonstrate original thinking in your writing. Summarizing the ideas of others does not constitute a critical essay. Moreover, just because an expert has made a claim does not mean that you can take that claim’s truth for granted. Even if you cite expert opinion in defense of some claim, you must still examine the bases for that claim and reveal the presuppositions made by that expert in arriving at that position.

Length: I envision these papers as being between three and five pages, but there are no requirements as regards length; shorter or longer essays are acceptable. For details of formatting, please refer to the syllabus for this class or the class website.

Criteria: Successful essays will offer original commentary on their chosen topic, showing that the topic is sufficiently complex as to be worth thinking about. Such essays will support their points with careful argument that elucidates a critical thought process. The various ideas in a successful essay must be tied together effectively, examining the subject matter in progressively greater depth as the essay proceeds. The conclusion will not reiterate the introduction, but will show that some intellectual distance has been traveled in the course of the essay.

Unsuccessful essays will suffer from a lack of clarity, poorly constructed prose, wordiness, or clumsiness. Potential failings related to the arguments include a lack of originality, failure to critically examine one’s own arguments, overly dogmatic claims, a topic that has no inherent interest or controversy, a general lack of complexity, or claims that however logically defended are not intuitively plausible or ethically conscionable. Finally, an essay might fall short if it is poorly organized, if the ideas do not fit together coherently, or if it doesn’t make any progress from start to finish.

Audience: Your essay’s ideal audience member is a thoughtful, educated person, generally familiar with the concept of rhetoric, but not well versed in the particular controversy that you are interested in.

This essay will be submitted twice, first as a draft then as a revision. The draft is due at my office (14N-316) on Friday, September 16, at noon. The revision is due in class on Thursday, September 29. In both cases, please submit an additional copy as an attachment by e-mail to aden@mit.edu on the due date. While the revision will determine the bulk of the grade for this assignment, the draft should be no less a submissible document. Both draft and revision should be properly formatted, free from typos and from grammatical and spelling errors, thorough, and complete. In short, edit.


C2: The Phaedrus
Due: Thursday, 15 September, class

You have been divided into groups of (at least) three. Each group is responsible for answering all of the following questions. Your answers will form the basis for discussion in Thursday’s class. Though you can certainly divide the questions among the individuals in your group, you should discuss these answers as a group before class, so that any of you is prepared to answer any of the questions. The written response to each of the three sections should be about two paragraphs, no more than one double-spaced page.

  1. Plato writes in this peculiar form, a dialog with more than one character. What impact does this have on the strength of his arguments and what impact on the nature of his project?
  2. Plato writes three speeches on love. What is the point of having three speeches, what lesson do we learn from this multiplicity of speeches? In the speech Plato seems most committed to, Socrates outlines a theory about how souls are like horses and riders, galloping around the universe. Does this image have any power over us modern readers? Why or why not?
  3. Plato argues that the ultimate rhetoric is that rhetoric inscribed on the soul of a man. What does this mean, and do you buy it?

Finally, each group should find one argument in Plato’s dialog that seems effective and one that does not seem effective. Be prepared to offer these examples in class and discuss why they were or were not effective arguments.


D1: Writing versus Speaking
Date: Tuesday, September 27, class

Topic: In The Phaedrus, Plato denigrates writing in relation to speech, arguing that writing is more a crutch than an inspiration to finding truth. Resolved that writing is inferior to speech.

Students who are not debaters should come to class prepared to ask questions. In particular, please have in mind one argument on each side that you think is especially compelling or even decisive.


S1: Stump Speech
Due: Tuesday, October 4, class

Prepare and deliver a speech, no more than four minutes long, in which you attempt to influence your audience’s behavior at the voting booth. This could mean a number of different things, and you are free to choose among them. Most straightforwardly, you might urge your audience to vote for a particular candidate or party. If you choose, you can deliver the speech as though you are the candidate in question, or a close associate, or you can just be you. Instead of trying to earn votes for a candidate, you could argue for the importance of a particular issue, urging conclusions about how that issue should influence voting. At bottom, the idea is to exert an influence over the voters, to push people to vote in a particular direction.

Research: Though this assignment does not require research, it is often persuasive to bring facts to bear in your case. In their stump speeches, candidates running for president frequently cite statistics or give concrete examples both to evince their claims and to augment the impact of their words with vivid stories or heart-rending anecdotes. If such evidence would help to give your speech additional power, make sure to do the necessary research, which probably won’t be much. Do not offer vague assertions with the proviso that “everyone knows” that this is the case. Assume you are speaking to an audience of intelligent skeptics, who will not choose to agree unless you give them compelling reasons. At the same time, be careful to help your audience to see the big picture, rather than getting lost in lots of interesting but “small” details.

Criteria: You will be judged on both the form and content of your speech. Formal elements include your pace, tone of voice, gestures, eye contact, stance, fluidity, and your general charisma or bearing. Your speech should be dynamic and spirited, with a sense of conviction, expertise, and affability. (You will not be judged on the quality of your attire, so feel free to wear what you would wear to class any other day. On the other hand, the t-shirt with mold growing under the armpits can’t help but give a certain impression.) Elements of content include the quality and originality of your ideas, the structure of your speech, your sensitivity to your audience, your choice of words and sentence structures, your use of compelling imagery, examples, and rhetorical tropes, and the cumulative force of your argument. Bear in mind that while images, analogies, anaphora, litotes, alliteration, and other rhetorical techniques can greatly enhance the power of a speech, these techniques must be appropriate to the context rather than contrived. You are often better off saying something in the most straightforward way possible, rather than risking the confusion of a metaphor that doesn’t quite work.

Format: Speeches will probably be spread out over three days of class, Tuesday, October 4, Thursday, October 6, and Thursday, October 13. (Tuesday, October 11 is a holiday in honor of Columbus. We may have to take more time, depending on how quickly the speeches go.) All speeches should be prepared for the first day, as speakers will be chosen at random on that day. We have lots of speeches to get through, so please be ready when your name is called. After your four-minute presentation, there will be some time for brief questions from the audience to which you are expected to respond intelligently and compellingly. Following the question-and-answer session, we will critique your speech as a group. Throughout your presentation, including the question period, you are advised to maintain a professional demeanor, though this does not mean that you must be formal or stiff. The point is to take your role seriously, to believe for those few minutes that you have the opportunity to exert an influence over a significant audience of voters.

Presentation: You can read, speak from notes, or deliver your talk from memory, but know that the most effective speeches have at least the appearance of a certain spontaneity. A speaker who reads verbatim from a sheet of paper invites doubt as to her sincerity. Whatever method you choose, you would be well advised to practice, probably a few times, to avoid stumbling during your presentation and to ensure that your speech fits in the allotted four minutes.

Though you should keep a copy of the notes or full text of your speech, you do not need to submit anything in conjunction with this assignment.


A2: Rhetorical Analysis
Due: Monday, 17 October, 3pm (draft)
Due: Tuesday, 25 October, class (revision)

This essay assignment asks you to perform a rhetorical analysis. Choose a speech given by a U.S. president or candidate for president and analyze it, discussing its rhetorical dimensions, their intended and unintentional functions, and their efficacy.

The greatest challenge of this essay is to find a thesis that will motivate your rhetorical analysis. Your paper should not be a list of the rhetorical devices employed in the text under analysis, nor will it be adequate to show that the speech (or other object) has some effective rhetoric and some ineffective rhetoric. Rather, your essay must develop an insight into its topic, a discovery that sheds new light on the rhetorical object and on rhetoric itself. Your essay must teach its readers something about the speech and the nature of rhetoric, something challenging or subtle that they would not have known themselves after looking at the same object. For instance, you might notice that Bush provides much more detail about evil than about good in one of his campaign speeches. Your essay could offer a theory to explain this imbalance in terms of his personality or speech writers or campaign strategy or audience, and then support that theory by analyzing the specific rhetoric of the speech. (Note that my hypothetical example does not specify the thesis of the essay, which would be a claim about Bush’s personality or campaign strategy or …. The thesis will depend on the particular evidence available and your means of interpreting it.)

Speeches can be found in newspapers and on the web, in text, video, and audio formats. You may choose any of these formats to analyze. Lots of text speeches are available at the websites listed in the “Links” section of the front page of our class website. You are also encouraged to seek out video or audio speeches and to consider the appearance and sound of the speaker. Please make sure that your essay indicates just what object you are analyzing, and provides adequate citation information for your reader to find the same object. You may include the complete text of the speech or other object you choose to analyze as an attachment with your draft, but nevertheless you should not assume that your reader has the text in front of her.There is no length requirement for this essay, but I imagine an effective rhetorical analysis as being around five pages. For details of formatting, please refer to the class website.

This essay will be submitted twice, first as a draft then as a revision. The draft is due electronically on Monday, October 17, and will be sent to me and to two peers for peer editing on Tuesday. The revision is due one week later, in class on Tuesday, October 25. In both cases, please submit a copy as an attachment by e-mail to aden@mit.edu on the due date. While the revision will determine the bulk of the grade for this assignment, the draft should be no less a submissible document. Both draft and revision should be properly formatted, free from typos and from grammatical and spelling errors, thorough, and complete. In short, edit.

Important Note: The feedback on this draft will come primarily from your peers. On Tuesday, October 18, please bring one copy of your draft to class and one copy of each of the two drafts you will have received from your peers. We will spend the day in class doing these peer edits. On Wednesday, October 19, you will send me an e-mail outlining in a paragraph or two your plans for revising the essay and your thoughts about the peer-editing process.


D2: International Cultural and Political Diversity
Date: Tuesday, 25 October, class

Topic: Resolved that it is desirable to tolerate a heterogeneity of political regimes and cultural values, even when that heterogeneity makes it more likely that democratic institutions will be attacked from without.

Background: (These notes help to explain the debate topic but are not part of the “offical” resolution. Debaters are free to take these thoughts as a guide or to ignore them.)

This resolution is an abstract issue that has lately been concretely instantiated in various contexts. Consider these three cases:

  1. In Afghanistan, an oppressive regime treated its citizenry brutally and sheltered groups who trained and planned to commit murderous acts of terror. Should the United States have tolerated this regime or was our overthrow of this government justified? What if the Taliban had been democratically elected but had still behaved brutally? What if the Afghani government had been oppressive and brutal but had not been harboring terrorist organizations?
  2. Iraq provides a second test case. Saddam Hussein was undeniably brutal but also (we now know) demonstrably weak, at least as far as his ability to wage war and commit atrocities in other countries. Nevertheless, he was ideologically committed to the destruction of the United States, Israel, and many democratic institutions, and his leadership of a large country helped to promote his values and spread them around the world. Was our invasion of Iraq and ouster of Saddam Hussein justified? Would it have been justified if he had been building weapons of mass destruction? Would it have been justified had he been an ideological supporter of Al Qaeda? This was a regime whose worldview was not only incompatible with ours, but whose express goals include the destruction of our way of life. Should we tolerate such a regime in the name of heterogeneity, or are we better off imposing our own view of what’s best?
  3. Finally, there is the example of Saudi Arabia, a country in which Islamic orthodoxy is dominant and inscribed in the laws of the land. This country too is committed, at least implicitly, to the destruction of our way of life, but seems less supportive of radically violent means of achieving this change. Our administration maintains personal ties to the leaders of Saudi Arabia, but the ideological differences are dramatic and irreconcilable. Should we impose a democratic order on Saudi Arabia, ensuring the rights of women and protecting its population from what we consider to be unreasonable restrictions on their freedom? Or should we tolerate what we might regard as a morally reprehensible situation in the name of freedom of choice and heterogeneity?

In the United States, individual freedom is protected, including even the freedom to speak and act against the interests of the government and other institutions that uphold democracy. Though this freedom is not unbounded, we believe that our citizens have a right to hold and express views at odds with the views of our Constitution and other representatives of cultural and political authority. There are many reasons that we support this right to freedom of thought, expression, and action, but one of them is our belief that a free society encourages innovation and experimentation. That is, we want to guarantee the right to complain about the government partly because we want to make sure that the government changes when such change is warranted. Furthermore, this freedom makes it more difficult for the government to oppress its citizens; the freedom of the population is a check on the actions of the government. In some sense, this topic is asking you to consider whether this principle should hold in the world at large, applied to other countries and cultures rather than to individuals.


S2: The Micropolitics of Everyday Objects
Due: Tuesday, 1 November, class

Prepare and deliver a speech, no more than six minutes long, in which you present the micropolitical dimension of an object or phenomenon that is not normally thought of as political. In terms of content, the speech should have three things: (1) a vivid and intriguing description of the object, (2) a detailed analysis of the political dimension of that object, and (3) a persuasive argument about how we should behave with respect to that object, given its political aspect.

Research: This is not primarily a research assignment. Though you may want to do some research to be able to indicate connections between your mundane object and the larger world, or to be able to cite surprising and little known facts about your object (or phenomenon), these will not be the focus of your speech. Rather, your speech will show that you have thought a lot about your chosen object, discovered aspects of it that your audience will not have thought of before.

Criteria: The criteria are pretty much the same as in S1. You will be judged on both the form and content of your speech. Formal elements include your pace, tone of voice, gestures, eye contact, stance, fluidity, and your general charisma or bearing. (You will not be judged on the quality of your attire, so feel free to wear what you would wear to class any other day.) Elements of content include the quality and originality of your ideas, the structure of your speech, your sensitivity to your audience, your choice of words and sentence structures, your use of compelling imagery, examples, and rhetorical tropes, and the cumulative force of your insight. Bear in mind that while images, analogies, anaphora, litotes, alliteration, and other rhetorical techniques can greatly enhance the power of a speech, these techniques must be appropriate to the context rather than contrived. You are usually better off saying something in the most straightforward way possible, rather than risking the confusion of a metaphor that doesn’t quite work.

Note: As this speech will be given in pairs, some part of the grade (which will be the same for both members of the team) will be devoted to the way in which you divide the speech between the two of you. Creativity will be rewarded, but so will sensible ways of splitting your task up. It may make sense for the topic itself to suggest a means of working out your division of labor.

Format: Speeches will take place over two days of class, November 1 and 3, with order to be determined randomly. Once again, there will be a couple of minutes after each speech for questions, plus a couple of minutes for critique, during which I will have an opportunity to complete my notes.

Presentation: This time, please do not read, though you may use notes. Also, please practice prior to your speech, not only to make it go more smoothly, but also so that you can be more certain of remaining within the allotted time frame of six minutes.

The bottom line here is to help your audience understand the way in which their actions and choices in the world really matter. The hard part of this speech is to make a genuine connection between the ordinary and the political. Note: to call something political is not necessarily to connect it to the government or the election process. Rather, a political dimension of an object is a way in which it takes on a value above its mundane role in our lives.


C3: Proposal for A3, on the Rhetoric of Technology
Due: Tuesday, November 15, class

Please write a proposal outlining your plans for the essay, A3. The proposal should be no more than one double-spaced page, about two medium-length paragraphs. Your proposal should specify which technology you plan to look at and where you will find the examples of rhetoric relating to that technology. You should also indicate at least broadly what your thesis might be or why you think this will be a good choice of technology. Please email me a copy of your proposal (inline) by the due date and time.


A3: Rhetoric of Technology
Due: Monday, November 21, noon (draft)
Due: Thursday, December 8, class, (revision)

Write an essay in which you analyze the meaning of some technology, looking especially at the rhetoric surrounding that technology. Choose some technology (current, future, recent, or archaic), find a number of examples of rhetoric relating to that technology, and produce an essay in which you discover the meanings of that technology in the rhetoric surrounding it.

The challenge of this essay, as usual, will be finding something worth saying about the rhetoric of your chosen technology, something to tie together all of your interesting analysis into a motivated essay. While you may have something in mind at the start of your writing process, it is often a good idea to allow yourself to write freely about your topic, generating ideas in a forum unconstrained by a preconception of a thesis. Then, take the most interesting few ideas at which you arrive, and weave them together into a consistently probing, progressive essay.

Research: This assignment requires at least some research, to find examples of the rhetoric of your chosen technology. You are also encouraged to consult secondary sources that analyze your chosen technology or its rhetoric, and to make use of these sources (with appropriate citations, of course) in your essay. However, “secondary” research is not essential. Though you may end up wanting to do a fair amount of research, be certain that your essay is mostly a presentation of your own original analysis and ideas. This is not a “research” essay, and should not be a summary of or list of the discoveries you make as you research your topic.

There is no length requirement for this essay, but I imagine that it will take around five to seven pages to treat the rhetoric of a technology in adequate detail. For rules of formatting, please refer to the class website.

This essay will be submitted twice, first as a draft then as a revision. The draft is due by email at noon on Monday, November 21. The revision is due in class on Thursday, December 8. Both draft and revision should be submitted electronically, as an attachment. While the revision will determine the bulk of the grade for this assignment, the draft should be no less a submissible document. Both draft and revision should be properly formatted, free from typos and from grammatical and spelling errors, thorough, and complete. In short, edit.

Conferences: In between draft and revision, there will a mandatory one-on-one conference between each student and the professor to discuss the revision process. Conferences will take place during the week after Thanksgiving, November 28 through December 1. Sign up for conference times in class. The conference process will be discussed in more detail in class.


D3: The Value of Technology
Due: Thursday, 17 November, class

Topic: Resolved that genetic engineering should be vigorously pursued as a means of improving the human condition.


S3: Open Topic Persuasive Speech
Due: Tuesday, 6 December, class

Prepare and deliver an extemporaneous speech, no more than five minutes long, on a topic of your choosing. The only stipulation regarding content is that it must be a persuasive speech, an attempt to influence the convictions of your audience.

Content/Criteria: The choice of topic is open. Though your speech must have real substance, thoughtful argument, and a genuine attempt at persuasion, the topic might still be humorous, hypothetical, or narrow. You need not be grave nor must your topic be severe. Without restricting your choice of topic, the nature of the assignment does suggest a number of guidelines. Your topic should be appropriate to the audience. Your topic should allow a thorough engagement within the time limit. Your topic should be motivated, which is to say, it should concern an issue that has or should have a value to your audience. As in a good essay, your speech should make an original and contentious claim, which it supports through critical, thoughtful analysis and appropriate use of evidence. Good speeches will generally have an introduction that clarifies the topic and establishes a common ground with the audience, as well as a conclusion that not only reiterates, summarizes, and closes, but also points onward toward farther reaching conclusions. Effective speeches tend to refer in the body of the argument to the central point; don’t forget to speak to your audience, keeping in mind that we are not as well versed in the details of your analysis as are you. These guidelines may not help you to figure out what to speak about. If you want additional assistance, please ask the instructor.

Grading: Your grade will be evaulated based on both content and form. Presentation is crucially important, and you will be rewarded for an effective use of rhetorical techniques, good intonation, pacing, body language, and other formal aspects of your delivery. But clever wording or entertaining antics cannot substitute for having something to say, and the content of your persuasive speech is paramount in the determination of your grade.

Format: The speech should be no longer than five minutes. When the speech is over, there will be five minutes for questions and comments from the audience. Speakers who exceed the allotted five minutes will have less time for commentary from the audience, as each speaker will have the floor for only ten minutes. This speech is extemporaneous, which means you are not allowed to read the speech verbatim. You may read, if you choose to, the introduction and conclusion of your speech. But the body of the speech should be delivered from memory or from note cards or an outline. You will be penalized significantly if you read your whole speech.

Audience: Your audience for this speech comprises your classmates and the instructor. Choose your topic and present your ideas accordingly.