KAIROS

 What motivated the writer to produce this piece?

I think the reviews he was getting from his students was what motivated this piece.

What social, cultural, political, legal, or economic conversations does this argument join?

I would say it is a cultural or social conversation.

Is the writer responding to another person’s text/argument? Is the writer addressing cultural trends (such as the impact of science or technology on values)?

No, I don’t think so.

 WRITER’S PURPOSE AND AUDIENCE

What is the writer’s purpose?

 Is the writer trying to change readers’ views by offering a new interpretation of a phenomenon, calling readers to action, or trying to muster votes?

Think about the original publication source of the essay. Who is the intended audience?

 What assumptions, values, and beliefs would readers have to hold to find his argument persuasive?

The extra information is very reliable informatin for his credability.

 Does the audience share a political, educational, or religious orientation with the writer?

Educational

How well does the text suit its particular audience and purpose?

If the audience is college students…it doesn’t. The language is very sophisticated. It would fir if the audience is other college professors.

 WRITER’S IDENTITY AND ANGLE OF VISION

 Who is the writer and what is his/her profession, background, and expertise?

The writer is Mark Edmunson. He is a college professor and has/is written for Harvard Magazine.

 How does the writer’s personal history, education, gender, ethnicity, age, class, sexual orientation, and/or political leaning influence the angle of his vision?

He has a lot of experience and schooling which makes his vision very sophisticated.

What is emphasized and what is omitted in this text?

 Is the writer advocating a stance or adopting a more inquiry-based mode?

How much does the writer’s angle of vision dominate the text?

 GENRE

What is the argument’s original genre?

 How popular or scholarly, informal or formal is this genre?

It is very scholarly and I would say quite formal.

What is the original medium of publication? How does the genre and its place of publication influence its content, structure, and style?

 Does the genre allow for in-depth or only sketchy coverage of an issue?

In depth.

LOGOS

 What is the argument’s claim, either explicitly stated or implicit?

Is the core of the argument clear, or does the reader have to unearth/reconstruct the argument?

What are the main reasons in support of the claim? Are the reasons audience- or writer-based?

Writer based.

How effective is the writer’s use of evidence? How is the argument supported and developed?

Very effective. He uses famous writers theories and quotes as evidence.

 How well does the argument recognize and respond to alternative views?

Does the argument depend on assumptions the audience may not share? If so, what are they?

ETHOS

What ethos does the writer project? Are you impressed or won over by this writer? If so, what has earned your respect? If not, why not?

How does the writer establish his credibility and trustworthiness? If he didn’t what make you skeptical?

The information at the end about the essay for harvard made his work more credible.

How knowledgeable does the writer seem in recognizing opposing views?

How important is the character of the writer in this argument?

PATHOS

How effective is the writer in using audience-based reasons?

 What examples, connotative language, or uses of narrative/analogy stand out for you in this argument?

How does the writer use concrete language, word choice, narrative, examples, and analogies to tap readers’ emotions, values, and imagination?

Does this argument rely heavily on appeals to pathos or is it more brainy and logical?

Brainy and logical.

WRITER’S STYLE

How do the writer’s language choices and sentence length and complexity contribute to the impact of the argument?

The language choices were very sophisticated. It was quite complex.

How readable is the argument?

Not readable at all. Not for me but maybe for a fellow professor.

Is the argument formal, scholarly, journalistic, informal, or casual?

Scholarly/formal

How well does the writer’s tone (attitude toward the subject) suit the argument?

Is the tone serious, mocking, humorous, exhortational, confessional, urgent, or something else?

Serious/mocking/something else.

OVERALL PERSUASIVENESS OF THE ARGUMENT

What features of this argument contribute most to making it persuasive or not persuasive for its target audience and for you yourself?

How would this argument be received by different audiences?

What is particularly memorable, disturbing, or problematic about this argument?

What does this argument contribute to its kairotic moment and the argumentative controversy of which it is a part?

What gaps, contradictions, or unanswered questions are you left with?