For Friday 8:30

Hello all,

Today, we began our journey by looking at our reactions to the trip across the desert by camel. After learning about our reactions to the end of relationships, we shifted to discussing Kafka's _The Metamorphosis_. For our discussion, you each created a question that connected Vogler and the readings. We then passed these questions to our peers, who created a Claim, Evidence, and Warrant based on the question.

For instance:
Sharon asked the question: When is Gregor's Call to Adventure? Is it when he knows he must reach the train or he might lose his job? Is it merely the fact that he is a cockroach? Or is it yet to happen?

Allie then issued a Claim: Gregor's call to adventure is the fact that he is a cockroach.

Evidence of this observation is: When he realizes he is a cockroach, he must change the way he used to live and adapt to the new him.

Warrant that interprets the evidence and shows how it supports your claim: Gregor's call to adventure is when he turns into a cockroach because he must understand it is time for a change and live with what has happened.

Here is some more clarification on this structure of logic and developing of ideas through this method.
Claim-Evidence-Warrant:
A Model for Analyzing Arguments
(adapted from the work of Stephen Toulmin)

Claim

Definition: A claim states your position on the issue you have chosen to write about.

• A good claim is not obvious. Why bother proving a point nobody could
disagree with?
• A good claim is engaging. Consider your audience’s attention span and
make claims which point out new ideas: teach the reader something new.
• A good claim is not overly vague. Attacking enormous issues leads only to
generalizations and vague assertions; keep it manageable.
• A good claim is logical; it emerges from a reasonable consideration of the
evidence. However, this does not mean that evidence has only one logical
interpretation.

Examples:
Though they seem mere entertainment, Hollywood movies are actually
responsible for reinforcing cultural stereotypes in America.
The most plausible explanation for the recent increase in gambling as
an acceptable pastime is the perceived stamp of approval by cultural
institutions, such as state and local governments and organized
religion.

Evidence

Definition: the evidence or data which you cite to support your claim. Like a lawyer
presenting evidence to a jury, you must support your claim with facts; an
unsupported claim is merely an assertion.

Data can include:
• Facts or statistics: objectively determined data about your topic. (Note:
“objective” may be open to debate.)
• Expert opinion: Learned opinion, theory, and analysis that you should cite
frequently, both to support your argument and to disagree with. Sources must
be quoted, paraphrased, and cited appropriately.
• Primary research: an explanation and discussion of your own research findings
and how they relate to your topic.
• Personal anecdotes: the most difficult kind of data to use well because doing
so requires a persuasive argument that your own experience is relevant and
can be objectively grasped by your reader. Personal experience can,
however, bring an argument to life.

Example:
Last year the State of Minnesota spent $X million dollars promoting their
state-run lottery through ads focusing on the contributions made to
environmental funds (Cary). Churches have used raffles, bingo nights, and
even card tournaments as fundraisers for years.


Warrant

Definition: the warrant interprets the data and shows how it supports your claim. In
other words, the warrant explains why and how the data proves the claim.

• A good warrant will be a reasonable interpretation and analysis of the facts.
• A good warrant will not make illogical interpretive leaps.
• A good warrant will not assume more than the evidence supports.
• A good warrant may consider and respond to possible counter-arguments
(refute).

Example:
Citizens look at the amount of time and effort devoted to promoting
gambling-related activities by their government and churches and assume
that this is a legitimate and even risk-free activity with little social stigma
attached. If the state and church rely on these funds to survive, gambling
may even be regarded as a social service: the more money they lose, the
more they’re helping others.

We also spent a good bit of time discussing the strangeness of this text. We discussed how Kafka seems to be making the story and the plot "strange" for the reader. Why do you think this is? How does taking elements of reality "out of reality" make the text operate differently then if the text followed the conventions of reality? These are some questions that we will be exploring as we move forward with our discussion.

We also briefly touched on Project Two, which will be the research/analysis/persuasive text. I would like you to think about the issues related to your life when you are exploring areas for future research. I don't want you to waste your time researching an "empty" topic. Pick an area of inquiry that reflects an interest that you have or seek to develop.

Remember, for Friday, you will need to bring in two drafts of your project one polished version into class. We will have a norming session on Friday to prepare ourselves for evaluation.

For Friday:

Read-N/a/

Write-Revise and edit your project one draft

Do-Bring two copies of your draft to class.

Take care, and thanks,

Kat