Minor Assignment 11/28/2018 As Montgomery details what kind of writing scientific writing is, he begins by stating how it is engaged in rhetoric, with the intent to persuade people.
“Scientific writing is also engaged in rhetoric- it aims not just to tell but to persuade. It wants to convince us that the result not only has meaning but is meaningful” – Montgomery (9) He goes on to use the term “rhetoric” a couple more times in the first two chapters of “The Chicago Guide to Communicating Science,” all with the same context, of being used to persuade someone on a topic. Through this repetitive use, it can be assumed that by “rhetoric,” Montgomery means to write in such a way as to convey an idea. He put significant emphasis on this idea, because he believes that writing in a rhetorical way is required within the sciences so that any reader who approaches the work, even one with no scientific background, would be able to understand and accept what the writer is trying to prove. Personally, within the scope of scientific literature, I think that writing with rhetoric in mind is a crucial part of any successful paper. In my mind, rhetorically engaged papers are significantly better for a couple different reasons. Firstly, many people run into issues by scientific papers burning them out. These papers can be dense, with a lot of tough ideas and language to wade through, leading people to putting them down before making it to the end. When papers are written with rhetoric in mind, this sense of being bogged down can be lessened by rhetoric adding a sense of conversation to the paper. Having somebody try to convince you of something helps to keep interest in a piece elevated, and thus helps to finish an entire paper. Secondly, it helps to show the writer’s passion for the subject matter throughout the paper, and when someone is passionate about something it can help draw other people into the subject and get them interested. Rhetoric is a crucial aspect of many different fields of writing, but especially in the sciences, just for these reasons. The sciences can be a daunting subject for many people to get involved in, but giving them a sense of conversation can help get past those initial worries. However, there’s another side to every story. It can also be important to examine science through a rhetorical lens, so that you are able to tell when someone is trying to persuade you on a topic. While many writers use rhetoric to make their papers more appealing, there is always a chance that what they are trying to convince you on is wrong. Examining papers with a rhetorical eye can help to identify these moments and allow you to look deeper into the topic to ensure you learn the truth.
1 Comment
1/28/2018 10:20:05 am
I like your point here about the importance of appealing to one's audience, and also the importance of knowing when someone is trying to appeal to you. I'm curious, though: do you think that scientific writing is rhetorical only when it is striving toward a more conversational and perhaps entertaining style? Is it possible that the really stuffy, wonky scientific research article is also rhetorical - possibly successfully so?
Reply
Leave a Reply.AuthorSophomore Marine Biology Major, Roger Williams University Archives
April 2018
CategoriesAbout
The purpose of these blogs were to serve as a mode to turn in minor assignments for my Professional Writing Class. Many are responses to reading we did, and a couple are first drafts of various major assignments. |