Welcome to Module/Week 4: Rhetoric and Ratification

Posted on: Monday, February 8, 2021 9:00:00 AM EST

Good Morning, and Welcome to Week 4!

.

I hope you are doing well! This week we will dig further into the Federalist Papers and related documents in an analysis of rhetoric and statesmanship. Rather than undertaking a wholly new set of readings, we will build on last week’s readings and add a brief excerpt from KHB and a journal article by Daniel Dreisbach (2011) on the use of biblical themes and passages in colonial rhetoric. Please read the assignment instructions carefully and prepare to present specific examples of rhetoric from the primary documents. Below is a summary of the week’s requirements, followed by some important guidance on doctoral-level analysis.

 

Reading & Study

Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers (from previous week)

Kelly et al.: ch. 8 (pp. 117–119), Appendix (U.S. Bill of Rights)

Bible Readings: 2 Timothy 3: 16-17

1 presentation: “Rhetoric and Statesmanship” (Purvis 2018)

1 article: “The Bible in the Political Rhetoric of the American Founding” (Dreisbach 2011)

 

Assignments

Reflection Paper 3: Effective Rhetoric (READ ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS!)

 

Looking ahead to the Reflection Paper, I want to offer some guidance on what constitutes analysis/analytical thinking in academic research, as this is an essential frame of mind for students in higher education.

 

In a previous announcement, I noted the three-part objective of most scientific research—to describe, explain and predict. Fundamental to each step in this process is the activity of analysis, defined by Rosenwasser and Stephen (2015, 2-3) as asking what something means, what it does, and/or why it is as it is; it is “a form of detective work that typically pursues something puzzling, something you are seeking to understand rather than something you believe you already have the answers to.” Distinct from expressive writing (writer-centered) and argumentation (reader-centered), analysis is subject-centered (Rosenwasser and Stephen 2015, 4-5). While these types of writing are not mutually exclusive (e.g. expressive writing and argumentation often include some level of analysis), they are not the same.

 

The unique goal of analysis is understanding of a subject through careful observation and study. This is best accomplished by adopting an ethos characteristic of academic scholarship: nonadversarial in tone, collaborative and collegial in approach, carefully qualified (avoiding overgeneralizations), and subject-centered (Rosenwasser and Stephen 2015, 10). Furthermore, analytical writing involves more than just summarizing information, although careful summary (e.g. of observations, historical background, research approach) is an important step in analysis that can lead to important discoveries relevant to one’s analysis.

 

As you prepare to analyze primary works and evaluate secondary works related to the American Founding, please keep the goals of analysis in mind. As doctoral students, you are expected to adhere to a high standard of analysis!

 

To help you move in this direction, I recommend adopting Rosenwasser and Stephen’s “Five Analytical Moves” (2015, 16-33):

 

Move 1: Suspend judgment (understand the subject before making a judgment)

Move 2: Define significant parts and how they are related (becoming observant is not natural; it’s learned)

Move 3: Make the implicit explicit (push observations to implications by asking “so what?”)

Move 4: Look for patterns of repetition and contrast and for anomalies (notice patterns and exceptions)

Move 5: Keep reformulating questions and explanations

 

I look forward to seeing some informative and thoughtful analysis in this week’s Reflection Paper!

 

 

 

What is rhetoric?

The use of rhetoric by founding fathers.

Rhetoric and the bible.

Rhetoric in modern political era

 

 

 

Rhetoric and Statemanship

Rhetorical skills of the founding fathers. Skills and knowledge. The primary documents and secondary documents. Together with legal records.

 

Why the Scripture (Dreisbach)

• Authoritative text
• Normative standards
• Gain insights into the character and designs of God
• Define normative standards and rules for ordering and judging public life

Relationships between biblical rhetoric and statesmanship

• Inform, interpret and persuade

Limitations of rhetoric when applied to history.

• Inconsistence (personal, group)
• Dependent on context
• Inconsistencies with law

 

Bible:

2 Timoth 3:16-17 –

James 1:19-26

 

 

 

History of mankind is replete with great speeches by statemen. These speeches when channeled towards doing good  has the amazing capacity to change direction of a nation or life of people. Such was the case of the founding fathers of United States of America who combined their idealistic  and revolutionary beliefs with great oral and written skills resulting in the founding of this great republic. Were these men naturally gifted or did they develop specific skills along the way that enabled them  to change the direction  of not just their lives but also the lives of many?

The relationships between language, politics, religion, and rhetoric have been subject of many philosophical and sociological investigations over the years (Wrobel,2015, 401). Such is the power of oratory that Athenians compelled their statesmen  to become orators; thus, laying the foundation for Aristotle…………….