IC #1: From Modern Argument to Dialectic

For our first "Weekly" of the semester, I'm assigning you an Intertextual Conversation that asks you to employ one of our principal course methodologies—putting topical readings into explicit and implicit conversation with each other—towards achieving new discovery (and even meta-discovery). For this assignment, you'll be synthesizing the work of two or three theorists in order to better understand their claims, their antecedents, their positions, and their position-ing within the field. This week's "theoretical turn" reflects rhetoric's role as epistemic (its role in relation to knowing). The assumption that modern theories of argument need to accommodate more dialectical forms of reality construction may provide a useful backdrop for how this week's theorists draw on some of the concepts that they do from classical rhetorical study.

The Task
Select one set of authors from this list below and describe how Author B's work reflects either a response to, a disruption of, a continuation of, or a reframing of Author A's principal arguments:

• Author A = Toulmin; Author B = Quigley
• Author A = Kneupper; Author B = Quigley
• Author A = Toulmin or Kneupper; Author B = Weisser and Liu

Remember that IC's are brief (~3 single-spaced pages) but that in spite of their brevity, I'll be looking for depth and breadth in your writing—that is, I'll be looking for you to demonstrate that you are beginning to grasp each theorist's overarching argument while also noting its nuances and intricacies, which will inevitably surface when you try to hold their ideas accountable to someone else's. This means that you'll want to weave together already nuanced summaries, demonstrate that you can identify the methodology or organization underlying most of their arguments, forward key terms or concepts important to the conversation you are constructing, and provide and cite salient examples from each text. Please include the full citation for the texts that you choose and use in-text (parenthetical) citations throughout your IC where needed.

If it helps you this week, think about your IC as truly helping us to chart a move—either toward or away from (or even beyond) a particular stance, imperative, position, or ideology. Also, if needed, you may absolutely invoke your authors from last week. This needn't be an isolated conversation, especially if invoking them would help you to justify a tenuous connection. However, do not feel compelled to do so, especially if you struggle with focus, because I want you to spend as much time as you can on this week's texts.
 
Submission
Please submit an electronic copy of IC #1 to Canvas by 3:30 p.m. on 9/12/17 9/17/17. I will make time to discuss them when we meet the following week in class. 

Do well but have fun with it,
-Dr. Graban