Toulmin’s “The Uses of Argument”; Read Sokal’s “Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity” Follow the attachment Read Toulmin’s “The Uses of Argument”; Read Sokal’s “Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity”

Toulmin’s “The Uses of Argument”; Read Sokal’s “Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity”
Follow the attachment Read Toulmin’s “The Uses of Argument”; Read Sokal’s “Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity”

Technical Writing

Reading Response, Week 4

Dr. Barrett-F ox

Directions: Answer the following questions in a 3-4 page
response.

1. Linguistic analysis: Considering that Sokal’s goal is to
confuse or knowingly parody postmodemists and
cultural studies humanists in Social Text, highlight and
explain five examples of places where his language
obfuscates, confuses, misstates, or otherwise tricks his
non-physics audience.

Reproduce each sentence, highlighting the spots
in which these obfuscations occur.

Explain each obfuscation (why or how it is
wrong, tricky, inaccurate, etc.).

Which elements of the technical writing
checklist does Sokal take advantage of? How
does he use them?

2. Argument analysis: Sokal attempts to mix (at least)
two fields (physics and cultural studies) in his article
in Social Text. Find a paragraph where Sokal makes
two different types of arguments (i.e., arguments that
come from two different fields make warrants and
draw credibility from two different places). Explain
each argument using Toulmin’s vocabulary: claims,
evidence, warrants, modal qualifiers, rebuttals.

Once each argument has been outlined, explain
the difference in warrants. Where does Sokal
draw credibility from? What makes him
believable?

How does Sokal use unspoken or tacit
assumptions behind warrants to his advantage?

3. Offering at least two examples from the text, explain,
using the language of the rhetorical situation, how
explain parody is a type of technical communication.

What are the elements necessary for parody to work
in this rhetorical situation? Is Sokal’s parody
successful? If so (or if not), what does it prove? What
is potential “social impact” of Sokal’s move? What
does it mean for the humanities and the sciences – and
their relationship?

Order from us and get better grades. We are the service you have been looking for.