The Syllogistic Method Where Good Thinking Good Writing

The Syllogistic Method Where Good Thinking = Good Writing 2/23/2021

Historical Overview Bastardizing Syllogisms From the Lyceum to Sperry High 2/23/2021

What is a Classical Syllogism? 1 st premise 2 nd premise _____ Conclusion 2/23/2021

Premises • When we reason, we start with some idea or fact or belief. That starting point is called a premise. A premise is the idea we don’t try to prove. We assume it is true. A premise is our reason for concluding something. When we reason, we combine two or more premises and draw a conclusion based on their connection: 2/23/2021

Syllogism • Premise 1: All men are mortal. • Premise 2: Socrates is a man. • Conclusion: Socrates is mortal. 2/23/2021

Syllogism • Premise 1: Arsenic can be deadly. • Premise 2: My dog ate arsenic. • Conclusion: It may die. 2/23/2021

Syllogism • Premise 1: Any thirty-five-year-old or older non-felon born in the US is eligible for the presidency. • Premise 2: James is a thirty-eightyear-old non-felon born in the US. • Conclusion: James is eligible for the presidency. 2/23/2021

Syllogism • Not all premises are stated. Some may be implicit or hidden. • Premise: All living things require water. • Conclusion: A cactus requires water. The unstated premise is “A cactus is a living thing, ” 2/23/2021

Inferences • The process of moving from the premises to the conclusion is called inference. Example: Where there’s smoke there’s fire. Look over there - a cloud of smoke. There must be a fire. 2/23/2021

Inferences • When we analyze inferences, we are evaluating not the truth or adequacy of the premises but whether the reasoning from them to the conclusion is justified. When we make an inference, we consider the premises and then derive a conclusion that follows them. • The strength or weakness of an inference depends on the extent to which the premises compel us to the conclusion. In any argument, we need to evaluate how compelling those premises are. 2/23/2021

Inferences • How compelling are the premises and how strong are the inferences in these examples? Example 1: I wrote her twelve letters but she never answered. She does not want to correspond with me. Example 2: Although we have been in two classes together, David has never invited me to go mountain climbing. David hates me. Example 3: A course in Western civilization provides understanding and appreciation of our institutions, and that is desirable. It should be required for all our students. 2/23/2021

Inferences • In the first statement, the premise is so compelling that no one would quarrel with the inference. • In the second, David’s failure to extend an invitation to climb a mountain hardly justifies the conclusion “David hates me. ” The inference is weak to ridiculous. • The third statement is trickier, is the inference strong or weak? Can we confidently make that leap to the conclusion? 2/23/2021

Enthymemes An argument in which one part - either of the premises or the conclusion - is missing is called an enthymeme, a term based on the Greek word meaning “to hold in mind. ” Example: The leaves of my poinsettia are yellowing. I should put on some nitrogen. * What we have to hold in mind is the second premise, necessary to justify the conclusion: yellow leaves usually indicate that a plant needs nitrogen. * A non-gardener would probably need the second premise to understand the conclusion. Often, however, the missing premise is just too obvious to require stating: 2/23/2021

Enthymemes • He just committed a murder. Arrest him. * No one would bother to say, “Anyone who commits a murder should be arrested. ” 2/23/2021

Enthymemes Sometimes unintentional enthymemes confuse the reader, as did this one from a student essay: Ernest Hemingway loved big-game hunting and contests of strength and skill. He often had fights with friends and competitors, and he especially loved boxing and bullfighting. His stories are often about men trying to prove their masculinity. It seems as though he was very much afraid that he wasn’t much of a man. The missing part of the argument is: Any writer so concerned with masculinity must be insecure. 2/23/2021

So Kuhn. . . How does this apply to my writing? A Closer Look at “Us & Them” by David Sedaris 2/23/2021

Tweaking the Syllogistic Construct to Suit our Needs - 1 st Premise = a statement about the text that contains a literary element - 2 nd premise = textual support (direct quote or paraphrased reference) - Conclusion = textual analysis 2/23/2021

Constructing the 1 st Premise • The syntactical manipulation of the second person pins the reader in the middle of the conflict between the Tomkey’s and Sedaris’s – our disgraceful sympathies either form an allegiance with the “them”, or breath a sigh of relief in the collective “us. ” 2/23/2021

Constructing the 1 st Premise - The discourse exchanges of the “Us” are often situated in the language of commodities and materialism. Good Observation … But So What? 2/23/2021

Constructing the 1 st Premise - The title belies the divisive dichotomy that separates these two families and their respective world views. 2/23/2021

Constructing the 1 st Premise - Quite paradoxically, the word “force” endures a significant semantic shift as the story progresses. 2/23/2021

Constructing the 1 st Premise - Even the imagery in the piece reinforces the dichotomous tension between the two factions. Sedaris, inexplicably and paradoxically drawn to the “puny lives” of the Tomkeys, renders their window into his veritable television set. 2/23/2021

A Look At Student Samples 2/23/2021

Sample 1(A) • In David Sedaris’ vignette “Us & Them” he creates several binaries to depict the differences between the “us” and the “them. ” He draws upon the binary of knowledge and ignorance as well as normal and abnormal. Through these, Sedaris shows how simpleminded children are and how skewed their vision of the world can be. The author, as a child, separates himself from those who are different by classifying himself as “us” and the others as “them. ” He believes them to be ignorant and abnormal. However, it is the opposite that is ironically true. 2/23/2021

Sample 1 (A) • Through the idea of ignorance versus knowledge, Sedaris establishes the “us” and the “them. ” The main differences between the majority of people (Sedaris included), and the Tomkeys is the Tomkeys do not watch television. To a child, who has been brought up in a culture so heavily dependent on TV, the idea of people being completely w/o it is unheard of: “I attributted their behavior to the fact that they didn’t have a TV …” Sedaris believes them to be more ignorant than everyone else - he treats them with pity. He wonders, “What must it be like to be so ignorant and alone? ” He talks about them condescendingly – “They had no idea how puny their live were. ” Sedaris does not consider them normal and therefore puts them in a different class, identifying himself as “us” – the majority of people who watch TV. The Tomkeys, therefore, signify an undesirable “them. ” 2/23/2021

Sample 1 (A) • With the issue of “us” and “them” comes the connotative quandary of normal and abnormal. Sedaris as a child believes the Tomkeys to be the abnormal ones while he and the rest of the television -watching populace, are normal. Sedaris begins to spy on them at home and describes their behavior – “Because they had no TV, the Tomkeys were forced to talk during diner. ” To the child, this seems strange, however this does seem like a rather normal activity. Sedaris’ activities, however, are the ones that appear strange. He hides in the bushes watching this family, and he treats them as a TV. For instance, when they go on vacation “[he] felt as if [his] favorite show had been cancelled. ” The day after Halloween, the …. 2/23/2021

Student Sample • The short memoir “Us and Them” by David Sedaris is a passage in which the role of paradox and ironic tensions are exemplified. Throughout the passage there are examples where the narrator negatively distinguishes his eccentric neighbors, the Tomkeys, as having less legitimate lives because their household lacks a TV. This is ironic because as the passage reveals itself, the narrator seems to embody those qualities that he so quickly characterizes the Tomkeys with. 2/23/2021

Continued • For example, on page 6 the narrator describes the Tomkey family as “ignorant and alone, ” which in truth are the qualities that he himself is epitomizing. The narrator is alone because he refuses to make friends, and ignorant because he feels that if he made friends with the Tomkey children, the “friendship would have taken away their mystery and interfered with the good feeling [he] got from pitying them. ” (page 6) Therefore we see the boy sacrificing a friendship just because he enjoys looking down on others. Another example of the boy’s hypocrisy is on page 6 where he declares that because they don’t watch TV, the Tomkey children “need a guide to point out all the things that they were unable to understand, ” when he himself is the one who doesn’t understand the benefits of a life with friends. He doesn’t understand the incompleteness of his own life while he criticizes others for lacking one unnecessary amenity. 2/23/2021

Student Sample Continued • And as the passage unfolds we continue to see through the Tomkeys just how unnecessary, and potentially harming television is to social life, which directly contradicts what the narrator so strongly believes in. Through and through, we see the television act as the major distraction and barrier in communication among the narrator’s family. On page four, the narrator’s parents say that they agree with Mr. Tomkey’s “non-belief” in television, yet, even as they say this, they go on to watch TV after dinner, proving that their addiction to the TV is distracting them from the irony between their actions and their words. Furthermore, the reader is able to gather that the narrator’s family life is not an easy-going one. While spying on the Tomkeys dinner, he talks about how Mr. Tomkey pounding on the table in mock anger and the rest of the family laughing gives him the idea that Mr. Tomkey is imitating someone. 2/23/2021

Same Paragraph • His question about whether Mr. Tomkey was imitating his own family tells the reader that the narrator’s home life is much more stressful than the relaxed laughing that goes on during the Tomkey dinner. The reason why the Tomkeys are so much more able to talk and joke with each other than the narrator’s family is because of the presence of the TV-distraction in the narrator’s household. Without the TV to rely on to distract them from any tension, the Tomkeys are able to work out any problems they might have and enjoy each other, where as the narrator’s family always seems much more tensioned because they rely on the uneffective method of using the TV to distract them from what should be verbally addressed. At the closing of the story we see how the narrator’s act of blatant greed by devouring the best candy for himself just so the Tomkey children could be deprived goes unattended because his parents are too distracted by the TV to scold him. 2/23/2021

Sample # 1 • In the end, we see through the narrator’s bias towards himself and can clearly understand that he is in the wrong. The author cleverly uses this overly confident and arrogant approach to show us that underneath the top layer of bias towards the narrator and his ways, there is really a favoring of the Tomkey family. By the end the reader can see that this superiority complex the narrator has isn’t based on anything except a few ideals that he gets from the television. The rest of his life is filled with selfcentered egocentricity and loneliness, where as we can see that the Tomkey’s life is much more wholesome. Therefore we see this narcissism and cruelty work in favor of the Tomkey’s and make the reader favor them by the end of the passage. 2/23/2021

Student Sample #2 • There are many unusual occurrences in the text, “Us and Them, ” such as how the author refers to his parents as either unsocial or unhappy hypocrites. For example, by stating, “My mother made friends with one of the neighbors, but one seemed enough for her, ” the author is implying that the mother has some sort of social issue. What’s also quite obviously contradicting is how the mother agrees with how Mr. Tomkey doesn’t watch TV and then the author (David Sedaris) says, “and then my parents watched the news, and whatever came on after the news. ” The test and basketful of okra given by Sedaris’ mother’s friend was given to his mother, because perhaps she came across as an unsocial butterfly to her friend as well. The test was to see how she’d respond to neighborly welcoming. 2/23/2021

Sample #2 Continued • Other statements are made, contrary to popular belief, hence leaving many befuddled readers. One of those many statements was, “I hoped that in walking around after dark I might witness a murder, ” which truly leaves one confused with the thought that usually people don’t hope to witness murders, especially walking around after dark. The way that the author states this, it’s almost as though he’s trying to hint that although, the narrator is unaware he is psychologically insane. Just a few other examples include statements such as, “the Tomkeys were forced to talk during dinner, ” and, “I would creep into their yard and hide in the bushes beside their fence, ” and later referring to the Tomkeys, “Could a normal person even imagine it? ” As though to say that stalking a family in their bushes just to observe how they act were such a normal action. 2/23/2021

Sample #2 Continued • The way that Sedaris continuously refers to the Tomkeys shows that he was trying to express his recent feelings of how he acted without sugar coating any of his actions. Each time that he mentions his pity for the Tomkeys and his reason for pitying them as he does, Sedaris comes across as even more ignorant. It’s a very pathetic situation when the author states, “I felt as if my favorite show had been cancelled, ” hence fourth implying that the narrator’s only real life was based off of others (which is exactly like television shows). Also pathetic, was how Sedaris’ sister Lisa said, “Who do these Tomkeys think they are? ” as if they were such bad people for putting open a common treat. There are starving kids in Africa for god’s sake! 2/23/2021

Sample 2 Continued • This is some of the reasoning to which the story, “Us & Them” is extremely contradicting and may very well leave the readers perplexed. 2/23/2021

Sample #3 • In the short story, “Us and Them, ” by David Sedaris, there are plenty of coincidences and scenes that are very ironic. The scenes go towards a point with a certain set of mind, and then take a contradicting turn, making them very ironic. 2/23/2021

Sample 3 Continued • At the end of paragraph 2 and the start of paragraph 3 on page 4, the narrator’s mother and father both agree with their neighbor, Mr. Tomkey, and his belief in not having a TV in the Tomkey’s house by saying, “Well good for him, I don’t know that I believe in it, either. ” Right after making this statement both the mother and father sit down to watch the news and anything else that came on after the news. This is almost humorous and yet ironic at the same time because the narrator’s mother and father seem to go along with Mr. Tomkey’s idea and belief towards the no TV in the house, but then sit right down to watch TV. It is very hypocritical and backward. 2/23/2021

Student Sample 3 Continued • In paragraph 3 on page 5, the narrator remarks how the Tomkeys are uninteresting by saying, “…they were not ashamed that a camera would have found them uninteresting. ” This is a very ironic statement because on that same page the narrator stands outside the Tomkey’s house for quite a long time, in desperation, just to see what’s going on inside. This showing a very strong interest in the Tomkeys, contradicting to the statement the narrator had said about them being uninteresting. Later on page 7, paragraph 1, the narrator speaks of the Tomkeys owning a boat and going on boat trips during the weekend. The narrator says, “…it did not make their absences any easier to bear. I felt as if my favorite show had been canceled. ” The narrator compares the Tomkey family to be as great as his favorite TV show, yet again contradicting the statement he had made earlier about the Tomkey family not being interesting. This scene is also ironic in the way that the Tomkey’s are against TV and their shows, yet here is a person looking at their family as if they were acting on a TV show. 2/23/2021

Sample 3 Continued • On page 8, in the scene where the Tomkeys come to trick -or-treat for Halloween on the 1 st of November, there is a lot of discomfort set in the narrator’s home. The narrator says, “…begging, and it made people uncomfortable. This was one of the things you were supposed to learn simply by being alive…” Later on the narrator tries to eat all of his Halloween candy, even though it makes him sick to eat, he still scarves it down so that way he doesn’t have to give it away to the Tomkey children. This whole scene is very contradicting because he just insulted the Tomkeys about how they are suppose to know not to beg on the 1 st of November for Halloween, and yet here the narrator is acting like a pig in order not to give away his candy, showing selfishness which is something you are suppose to know “simply by being alive. ” Then on page 12, the narrator talks about how he felt he was being generous when he wondered about the Tomkeys, which is ironic because when the real opportunity came for him to be generous, he acted selfish. 2/23/2021

Sample 3 Continued • A last ironic thing in this story is that the narrator says on the last page how the TV fortunately showed other images to move his mind away from the embarrassing scene with the chocolate, which had earlier taken place. Looking at the narrator you see how he eases his guilt and conscious by watching TV and distracting himself, which is what people everyday do in order to make themselves feel better. This is ironic to me because the Tomkeys come across to everyone as weird and horrible, yet they don’t need a TV to ease any pain or guilt which shows who has the cleaner slate, everyone or the Tomkeys. In this case the Tomkeys. This I think is very ironic and backward. 2/23/2021

Sample 4 • The essay “Us and Them” by David Sedaris presents a slew of societal differences that craft direct opposition between the “normal neighbors” and the Tomkeys. Although these two groups have completely different views on most things, throughout the work there is a unifying factor of the value of orthodoxy and the happiness of who adheres to it. 2/23/2021

Sample 4 Continued • The neighbors and the Tomkeys represents opposite ends of the orthodoxical spectrum. The author juxtaposes their different views on television. “…For the most part our neighbors just sat in their living rooms, watching TV. The only place that seemed truly different was owned by a man named Mr. Tomkey, who did not believe in television” (4). This dichotomy epitomizes the differences in orthodoxy – while the neighbors spend most of their time watching television, the Tomkeys don’t believe in the concept of it. This idea of orthodoxy is consistent throughout the work. While most kids have colorful lunch bags with pictures of television characters, the Tomkeys have plain brown bags that say nothing. While most families eat dinner and are finished well before 8: 00, the Tomkeys often start dinner at that time. And while the rest of the town is celebrating Halloween on October 31 st, the Tomkeys go to the lake and leave out a bowl of candy, returning on November 1 st and going trick-or-treating then. 2/23/2021

Sample 4 Continued • The irony in it all is that even though the Tomkey’s defy convention, they are not any less happy than those that follow the accepted view, as shown by their dinners. “Because they had no TV, the Tomkeys were forced to talk during dinner…During the meal, Mr. Tomkey would occasionally pound the table and point at his children with a fork, but the moment he finished, everyone would start laughing” (5). This juxtaposition of the two contrasting dinners brings to question how orthodoxy affects a family’s time together. Ironically, it seems that while the conventional family sits and watches television while eating dinner, the Tomkeys talk and laugh as if they are happier. This is also true with Halloween. To the narrator and his siblings, Halloween is very serious. The candy that they “earned” is for them and them only, so much so that the narrator would sacrifice the happiness gained from enjoying the candy slowly, just so that the Tomkeys could not have the best candy. On the other hand, the Tomkeys find much more joy in Halloween. . 2/23/2021

Sample 4 Continued • They do not care about going trick-or-treating on Halloween so that they may get the best candy. Instead they are much more relaxed and go when they want to, even if it means sacrificing normal societal standards, which would label it rude to ask for candy on any day beside Halloween. Dinner and Halloween show the ironies surrounding the dichotomy of the neighbors and the Tomkeys. While the neighbors very closely follow orthodoxy and the Tomkeys do not, the Tomkeys are evidently happier, bringing into question the value of conformity as something to be desired 2/23/2021

Sample 4 Continued • “Us and Them” is full of opposites concerning the “normal” neighbors and the Tomkeys. But throughout it there is the constant question of the value of conformity. Despite the concrete differences between the two groups, they are tied together by their concern with conformity and the different effects adherence has on them. 2/23/2021