The Stases in Scientific and Literary Argument

Abstract

This article explores the usefulness of identifying the stasis of an argument, that is, whether it concerns an issue of fact, definition, cause, value, or action. The stasis of an argument can be seen as a component that has to be justified. An author must either assume or overtly appeal to the value of addressing a particular audience on a topic in a particular stasis. Once this principle of rhetorical analysis is in place, it is especially useful as an approach in the current enterprise of analyzing the rhetoric of the disciplines. While arguments in public forums naturally exploit the full stases, arguments in disciplinary contexts usually concern only the first two. “Exemplary” arguments in representative issues of Science and PMLA are then analyzed for their stasis and how they justify arguing over the issues they address. While science articles open and reopen questions of fact, classification, and cause while assuming the value of their enterprise, articles in literary criticism are problematic. They concern issues of value that are to a great extent already granted by their audience.

Value Arguments in Science Research Articles

“…However, Fahnestock and Secor (Fahnestock, 1986;Fahnestock & Secor, 1988) observed that value does have an important role as preliminary or mini-arguments for the importance of the primary stasis. Analysis of stasis in texts has typically focused on identifying the primary point of contention-fact, definition, evaluation, and procedure-and then determining how a rhetor makes the case for that stasis.…”

“…Generally, a rhetorical discourse has a primary stasis to be argued, and Fahnestock and Secor (Fahnestock, 1986, p. 278;Fahnestock & Secor, 1988) make the case that the primary stases in science articles are fact and definition, with evaluation as "largely understood" by the audience of other scientists in the field (Fahnestock, 1986;Fahnestock & Secor, 1988), a preliminary argument for the importance of the primary stasis (fact or definition) that has already been accepted by the audience. Generally, a rhetorical discourse has a primary stasis to be argued, and Fahnestock and Secor (Fahnestock, 1986, p. 278;Fahnestock & Secor, 1988) make the case that the primary stases in science articles are fact and definition, with evaluation as "largely understood" by the audience of other scientists in the field (Fahnestock, 1986;Fahnestock & Secor, 1988), a preliminary argument for the importance of the primary stasis (fact or definition) that has already been accepted by the audience.…”

Bridging and Conversation in International Relations

“…Over the centuries, many scholars of rhetoric have adjusted and shaped the categorizations, such that many possible lists of the stases have been presented and debated (Fahnestock and Secor 1988). Oftentimes introductory textbooks on the study of argument will present these categorizations without explicit reference to stasis theory.…”

Literary Scholars Processing Poetry and Constructing Arguments

“…In recent years, writing-inthe-disciplines researchers have begun to study "what literature professors do" in scholarly articles (Bazerman, 1988;Fahnestock & Secor, 1988, 1991MacDonald, 1987MacDonald, , 1989MacDonald, , 1992MacDonald, , 1994Wilder, 2005). These studies have contributed much to our understanding of the textual forms of literary argument, but they do not tell us how literary professionals process primary texts and plan scholarly arguments.…”