Skip to Main Content
Emory University Emory Libraries

ARTHIST 329|CL 329 Greek Sculpture in the Age of Kings

From the King’s Peace in 370 BCE, which ushered in the Late Classical Period, through to the Roman conquests that marked the end of the Hellenistic Period in 30 BCE, “ancient Greek” sculpture underwent a radical evolution. This course will study how the a

Assignment

Draft a paper about a key scholarly debate on later Greek sculpture, outlining your argument based on two distinct rhetorical structures - Toulminian and Rogerian and then writing a 6-page (double-spaced, Times New Roman, etc.) paper employing your preferred style. 

Toulminian

“Toulmin Argument - Purdue OWL® - Purdue University.” https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/historical_perspectives_on_argumentation/toulmin_argument.html

What is the Toulmin Method?
Developed by philosopher Stephen E. Toulmin, the Toulmin method is a style of argumentation that breaks arguments down into six component parts: claim, grounds, warrant, qualifier, rebuttal, and backing. In Toulmin’s method, every argument begins with three fundamental parts: the claim, the grounds, and the warrant.

A claim is the assertion that authors would like to prove to their audience. It is, in other words, the main argument.

The grounds of an argument are the evidence and facts that help support the claim.

Finally, the warrant, which is either implied or stated explicitly, is the assumption that links the grounds to the claim.

The other three elements—backing, qualifier, and rebuttal—are not fundamental to a Toulmin argument, but may be added as necessary. Using these elements wisely can help writers construct full, nuanced arguments.

Backing refers to any additional support of the warrant. In many cases, the warrant is implied, and therefore the backing provides support for the warrant by giving a specific example that justifies the warrant.

The qualifier shows that a claim may not be true in all circumstances. Words like “presumably,” “some,” and “many” help your audience understand that you know there are instances where your claim may not be correct. 

The rebuttal is an acknowledgement of another valid view of the situation. 

Rogerian

“Rogerian Argument - Purdue OWL® - Purdue University.” https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/historical_perspectives_on_argumentation/rogerian_argument.html

The Rogerian argument (or Rogerian rhetoric) is a form of argumentative reasoning that aims to establish a middle ground between parties with opposing viewpoints or goals.  The Rogerian argument can be viewed as dialectic in nature (a conversation between two or more parties with the goal of arriving at some mutually-satisfying solution).

A successful Rogerian argument will likely include the following:

  1. Introduction (addressing the topic to be discussed and/or the problem to be solved)
  2. Opposing position (showing that you understand your opposition’s viewpoints/goals)
  3. Context for opposing position (showing that you understand the situations in which their viewpoint is valid)
  4. Your position (introducing/addressing your viewpoint as it differs from the reader’s)
  5. Context for your position (objectively showing the reader the context(s) under which your position is valid)
  6. Benefits (appeal to the opposition by showing how they would benefit by adopting elements of your position)

Havlicek’s classroom. “Chapter 3: Analyzing Arguments.” . http://havlicek.weebly.com/chapter-3-analyzing-arguments.html