1. What are Aristotle’s three genres of rhetoric and what kinds of writing in the discourse of scientists do they pick out?
* Epideictic Rhetoric, deliberative (review article, define and further research), forensic (like scientific reports, experiment and interpretation)
* Epideictic rhetoric in science has been less explored
2. What are the five general types of statement in science that Casper uses in his study of Nobel lectures?
- conjecture or speculate type 1, claims not widely accepted with modalities type 2, accepted knowledge with modalities, common accepted knowledge type 4, taken-for-granted facts type 5
3. What does it mean to say that something is "stated with modalities?"
* a statement that is not 100% fact, but it’s made to sound accurate with something like “there is a lot of evidence pointing to or “this shows this”
4. What are the four types of question that classical stasis theory identifies in any argument?
* Questions of fact: What is the act? What happened?
* Definition or cause of the act: How should the act be named? What caused it?
* Questions of Judgement: Is the act good or bad?
* Questions of Procedure: What should be done about it?
5. How do classical stases apply in analyzing scientific discourse?
* evidential: what exists or doesn’t exist in the natural world?
* Interpretive: facts are settled, but argue on what theory applies and so on
* Evaluative: the significance
* Methodological: procedures and techniques + what will be the outcome
6. At what point in his analysis does Casper identify scientific discourse that describes "science as it is actually performed?"
- he is talking about the nobel prize lectures because they talk about the start, stop, and pitfalls differently than a research report does, it’s how science is actually performed
7. As a result of his analysis of Nobel lectures what characteristics does Casper attribute to epideictic...