Toulmin Logic

So, this is an attempt at trying to explain what Toulmin logic is, how it is used, and how it changed argumentation.  When this name was dropped in class I was one of the "deer in headlights" staring back at Dr. Rice.  I wanted to say that the name was familiar, but until I started looking around on the internet nothing was clicking.  Here is what I found out-this is still somewhat shaky, but will at least get the base ideas out since I didn't have time to read The Uses of Argument, Introduction to Reasoning, or Human Understanding maybe the blog-o-sphere is just the place to try to form these ideas more completely.
To start with there are six elements to analyzing arguments or as Toulmin calls it "practical argumentation", which include: Claim, Evidence, Warrant, Backing, Rebuttal, and Qualifier.  This methodology of argumentation was a move away from absolutists' theoretical argumentation toward something more practical-similar to courtroom argumentation.  Instead of trying to pile up evidence to make an absolutist claim, this model starts with a claim then provides justification for it.  Toulmin thought "that reasoning is less an activity of inference, involving the discovering of new ideas, and more a process of testing and sifting already existing ideas—an act achievable through the process of justification.  Toulmin believed that for a good argument to succeed, it needs to provide good justification for a claim."
It is also important to note that, from what I've read, all good arguments will use claim, evidence, and warrant-but not necessarily backing, rebuttal, and qualifiers every time.  This is a good example of the logic in use, this plus the two previous links on 'Toulmin' should be able to show this process in a couple of different ways in order to better understand his theories.  The importance of these ideas' introduction into the world of rhetoric wasn't discovered immediately, but when rhetoricians Wayne Brockriede and Douglas Ehninger got a hold of the material it was implemented.  Toulmin didn't even realize that his ideas of logic were applicable to rhetoric and other areas until Introduction to Reasoning when he make the first comments about rhetoric.  This book was published 21 years after The Uses of Argument hit the market, so his ideas slowly percolated over into the world of rhetoric, but it certainly wasn't immediate.  I like the simplicity to this approach, and how it really does make one's argument easier to follow, understand, and be convinced.

Kairos

It is an interesting idea that blogs are more effective, because they are traditionally short and easy to create.  It allows a space that has been rising in popularity  due to its ability to say things at the right time.  The American readership seems to be shifting away from the print media (newspapers, magazines, etc.) in order to get the most up to date news.  They have been shifting to blogs and the internet in order to get material from those who were actually there.  We are moving to a position of prizing the first hand account over the 24 hour new/media conglomerate stations.  The space of a blog fits with a kairotic form of learning that allows the right things to be said, in the correct amount, and at the right time.  Blogs are a great way to promote kairos within the classroom if the syllabus can change in order to suit the students' learning.  The static syllabus cannot attack these issues with the same levity simply because they lack the ability to change to better suit the audience (student and their writing's audience).   If the syllabus can change the material to better suit the audience, or if the syllabus allows the blog as a space for the student's to respond in a kairotic way (due to short concise nature, accessibility, and informality).
I am trying to go back within my own syllabus to see how I can make emphasize kairos within the student's writing.  I think that blogs or moodles as a form of reflection to sum up each week is a good route.  I could also see having the students find material through others blogs that would relate to their topic, and use that as a launching point for their own research agenda and thesis building.  Something like make the students find a blog that discusses their chosen genre (video games, literature, engineering, architecture, painting, etc.) and use it to form an argument that would be written up and turned in through blog or moodle with a link to the original blog they are refuting/agreeing/comparing with/to.  This would allow their own writing to become more kairotic as well as the syllabus supporting it.  It needs more thought, but I think I am starting to be able to see the usefulness of kairos within the syllabus and classroom.
I am trying to brainstorm on other possible ways to make my own syllabus to be able to conform to the weekly agenda that is now required, and also make it adjustable to better suit the students.  I think the assignments could be the key in filling in this gap.  I wonder if there are any other approaches outside of the blog-o-sphere that could also be enabling the use of kairos within the classroom.  Could film & tv be used in this way?  Could a greater emphasis on culture and societal impacts actually make my syllabus more kairotic?  I still keep going back to the assignments as the way to attack this within my syllabus, but what do you think-are there other ways?

The Fringe (pertaining to Composition-not the FOX show)

Our conversation in class on Tuesday left my mind moving in many different directions.  I think within this blog I am going to have to be a little schizophrenic and play my own devil's advocate, because I am going to begin by why I like the fringe and why I think it is useful and then go to the other side of the argument.  For this I will be referring to this handy .jpg I made just for  you...

Example of Critical/Scholarly Movement: or a heart monitor w/ irregular beat 

The fringe is important because I think that is the work in which people are allowed to bring in their under life and let it effect the literature.  For example, I have been working on some articles that focus on graphic novels' impact on film.  So, through the film classes that I've taken here I was able (and encouraged to) bring my comic-book-nerd-under-life into my writing.  I think that this is not only a subject that is important to film today, but it also makes me excited as hell to be able to be bringing in V for Vendetta, From Hell, 300, Watchmen, Batman(I have tons but specific to the Nolan movies), etc.  This has not only made me ecstatic, but also I think I produced some of my best writing to date.  The black line from "A" to "B" is so boring, because it doesn't allow the caveats that I think can broaden and expand ideas and learning.  It seems too formalist to me, "here is your text and the premier scholar... You there! No thinking outside the box!".  Ugh, sends chills down my spine, because I've been through those types of classes and I hated them.  The fringe is better because it allows for the students to branch out from the literature/composition/core concept and apply it to something else to see how it fits.  Let them try to jam the block shaped like a star into the the side of the box with the circle shaped hole cut out of it until they figure out it fits much better w/ the star shaped hole cut out.  Through this process I think it creates better students in the end, because they can figure things out things for themselves.

On the other hand, I do realize that the quickest route between two points is a straight line.  For progress's sake (not only in composition & literature classrooms, but medical advancement, scientific findings, all forms of research, etc.) it is best to find a more direct way to get to point "A" to point "B".  The faster we can achieve that, the faster we can move on to the next leap from "B" to "C", and so on, and so on.  What about all the time wasted by the red line's wasted movement?  What could we achieved already if we weren't wasting time arguing all these points (some of which are bound to be more asinine than others)?  These are just digressions that could be keeping us from the larger truth.  This approach would create better students because they would know more from having less digressions.  These students would leave having gotten to point "D" where as those red students barely made it to "B".

I went a little bipolar there on purpose, because I feel both have valid arguments.  how can we include both?  Do I have to become the classroom Czar and rule on what is and is not valid digressions? "Good point Timmy, let's expand on that..." or "Fred, stick to the text"  I think it is a hard line to find the acceptable amount of digression that allows the benefits of the fringe, but not to take away from what the goals of the class actually are.  I think my own under life would still influence my own outlook of what is valid.

And now for a digression.  This is Jon Stewart's speech at last Saturday's rally for sanity/fear.  This is at the very end of everything-the one semi serious moment.  I think it relates our discussion of only A & B being heard if the fringe isn't there, and too much fringe creates chaos.  It's about 12min long and relates to his perception of the media, not composition. Regardless, it relates (kinda).