Analyzing Your Own Arguments A As ss si ig gn nm me en nt t # #3 3: : E EN NG G 2 28 83 3

For this assignment, in a 11.5-page single-spaced essay, you should:

1) Reproduce an argument youve made recently (that is, recently enough that you remember it).
This could be an enthymematic argument, but it doesnt have to be. The important thing is that
you reproduce the details as if you were making the argument again, in this essay. This means
that you should make sure to explain the argument, and any references you make, with sufficient
context for a reader who is not familiar with the situation. Be sure, also, to explain any possible
objections to your argument (for the sake of thoroughness).

2) Next, point out at least 3 rhetorical concepts weve covered this semester that youve made
use of in your argumentup to and including the concepts we covered in Chapter 8 of ARCS.
Basically, in this second section of your essay you are rhetorically analyzing your own argument.

3) Finally (and dont skimp on this part!) consider the fact that there are portions of your
argument that ignore certain facts, skip over or unfavorably distort counter-arguments, and
otherwise make use of what might be (incorrectly) considered non-rational argumentative
strategies. In other words, consider the ways that you self-justify and otherwise reduce cognitive
dissonance (as Tavris and Aronson discuss), and, the way that you might use different standards
and otherwise manipulate your rhetorical strategies in a way that favors your own ingroup and/or
makes an outgroups arguments seem less sound (as discussed in Roberts-Millers article). As
just a few possible examples of questions you may ask yourself for this section:

How might your logic rely on emotional attachments to certain arguments/conclusions? And
what conclusions or data are left out of your argument because of this?
If you use an emotional appeal, how might the appeal might be unfair to certain groups?
What assumptions might your enthymematic reasoning or your use of commonplaces gloss over?
How might a previous experience have caused you to be more extreme in your endorsement or
condemnation of certain views (in other words, how might your argument be self-justifying your
own previous actions/views)?

As Tavris and Aronson discuss, such self-reflection is difficult, almost impossible, so youll
really have to strive to get outside of yourself for this part of the assignment. The key to this,
though, is to remember that it is almost impossible when constructing an argument to not bend
your arguments in your own favorand, to remember that everyone does this.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12-pt Times New Roman (or comparable font) is required.








Grading Scale (same as with the other response assignments):
1 did not fulfill the requirements of the assignment
2 fulfilled the basic requirements, but did not explore the issue in a substantially elaborate
and complex manner (as stipulated by the assignment)
3 fulfilled the assignment requirements, and explored the issue in an elaborate and
complex manner
4 fulfilled the requirements, and went above and beyond (in complexity, nuance, and
depth, not in length) in the analysis of the issue.