Ladann Kiassat

Tym Chadjas

WRIT 2

20 August 2020

The Competence of Two to Speak on One

Set in motion by the great works of Pythagoras of Samos, innately curious bodies

dedicate an entire lifetime to the pursuit of absolute knowledge in an academic discipline that

drives their inquisitiveness. A testament to this is validated in the mere thousands, if not millions

of genres dedicated to disentangling the findings within academic disciplines. These revelations

have been published in varying forms of lingual utterances, whether it be advances in the Life

Sciences or Gender and Women's studies. The argument of specific barriers women face in the

pursuit of higher education can be scrutinized through the disciplinary lens of either Gender and

Women's studies or Life Sciences. Still, the specific tactic taken by these distinct disciplines to

approach the same topic is utterly reliant on a set of unique writing conventions that are upheld

in each discipline's discourse community. Although both disciplines explore the same question,

the tactical modes of argumentation and rhetorical analyses employed based on the given

evidence vary significantly in between on.

The specificity of how a discipline portrays analysis in writing is legitimized by the

discourse community the discipline belongs to, furthermore propelling the idea that its discourse

community purely defines a discipline. This idea is a consequential result of a discourse

community being defined by the "texts and languages, the genres and lexis" that enable its

members around the world to "maintain [the disciplines] goals" while "[communicating]
 Ladann Kiassat 2

efficiently" with members within the discourse community. The validating properties that are on

display are the result of "broadly agreed" set of common public aspirations, modes of

"intercommunication" among the members of the discourse community (such as journals), and

the utilization of "one or more genres in the communicative furtherance" of the discipline

(Johns). The biological mechanics behind a discourse community are "a threshold level of

members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise" related to the

discipline. By exploiting this discoursal expertise, this allows for the "participatory mechanism"

within the discourse community to provide information and feedback (Johns). The claims made

regarding discourse communities convince the notion that two distinct disciplines should have

two very different discourse communities that abide by the conventions and qualifications upheld

by that discipline.

On the account of diction and mode of writing that is conventional to the Life Science

discourse community, the article "Barriers to Success for Female Physicians in Academic

Medicine" displays a logical charm that strengthens the argument at hand. By pointing out that

"as of 2012, only 13% of full professors, 32% of associate professors, and 43% of assistant

professors are female," the argumentative properties become coherent with statistical facts that

support the previously stated logical claim that women "remain grossly underrepresented" in

positions of academia, appealing to the audience through reason (Wietsma). The author uses

specific diction and method of writing to logically reason and statistically analyze her way

through the argument, creating credibility based on clear factual evidence that the audience can

inevitably see. One could argue that given the statistical data, the audience can draw their own

conclusions, however, it is essential to note that the author makes an initial claim pertaining to

the statistics that follow after, creating a train of logical thought that the audience consciously
 Ladann Kiassat 3

follows. In defense of her argument, the author employs facts supported by statistical analysis,

which has overarching credibility in comparison to an emotional appeal in the audience's

perspective. Unlike the appeal to emotion that can lead to subjectivity, the author presents

statistics supporting an objective claim, creating indisputable credibility in the reader's

perspective.

As the article progresses, the author develops claims that highlight some adverse effects

of potential solutions that were given in the article. She emphasizes that "even though part-time

employment" and the "extension of one's probationary period" provides flexibility, these options

hinder productivity, hindering academic advancement (Wietsma). The goal of this argument is

not to persuade, but rather to convince. Rather than using statistics, the author builds on top of

evidence previously stated to develop her argument. This tactic is used not to overwhelm the

reader with more statistics but instead help them better understand the already given statistics.

According to Everything is an Argument, the writer is employing an argument to convince",

which revolves around the idea of "academic articles [that are] typically aim[ed] to convince"

rather than persuade. The author creates a sense of urgency in the minds of the readers, which

adds a personal aspect to the article, appealing to the emotions of the readers, furthermore,

convincing them of the argument. By appealing to the reader's sentiments, the author adds an

extra layer of legitimacy in a rhetorically effective practice that does not come off as staggering.

In exploring a separate discourse community of an unrelated discipline to Life Sciences,

Gender and Women's studies, discourse communities uphold distinctively different conventions

that, consequently, strengthen the argument presented in the discipline. In the article "Exploring

the Experiences of Female Graduate Students in African Universities: Questions about Voice,

Power, and Responsibility," uses an empowering tone to discuss the issue at hand, while
 Ladann Kiassat 4

employing a model of diction that elegantly showcases an appeal that is reliant on the credibility

of the protagonist. The author promptly in the article asserts that "[African American]

experiences embody diverse histories and circumstances" noting that "African female graduate

students are a diverse group" shaped by experiences that are "mediated by class, race, religion"

(Okeke-Ihejirika). The efficiency of appealing through the credibility of the protagonist instills a

sense of longing for justice in the audience's minds. The placement of this initial argument

immensely contributes to the heightened emotional state of the audience. Consequently, this

feeling creates an empathetic mindset that the audience holds onto while reading the rest of the

article. An argument that capitalizes on emotionalism intrinsically spawns a capacity of

judgment that has an emotional tint to it. It creates a moment for the audience to accelerate to a

conclusion that is heavily allured by emotion.

Throughout the article, the use of emotionalism as a means of cajolery inflates,

characterizing the type of argumentation used in the discourse community presented. The article

weaves the idea that the "significance as well as irony embedded in a gender dynamic" that

intrinsically discourages women's career ambitions', an interpretation equates to a "less than

equal" level of status for "female high achievers" in comparison to their male counterparts

(Okeke-Ihejirika). This impassioned driving force encourages women not to bow down to the

conditions presented by societal and familial strain. The author's intended, but rousing

justification fixates on an argument to persuade. In the book, Everything is an argument this type

of argument can be categorized as an "argument to persuade" because of the tactical modes it

uses. The argument not only "convinces [the] audiences" but propels them "to move [into]

action" through argumentation. It can be noted that through appealing by the protagonist's

accountability, the argument tactically gives the audience a sense of responsibility to act on the
 Ladann Kiassat 5

information presented, whether through activism or awareness. Instilling the ideas that are

concerning sympathy and empathy strengthens the chances of appealing to the audience on a

personal level that further advances the author's campaign for action because a sort of conscious

guilt will linger in the minds of the reader.

Upon analyzing both disciplines and the discourse communities, they reside in, quite

obviously, the difference in employment of rhetorical conventions to contract arguments reveal

itself. Being that Gender and Women's Studies would be in the realm of the humanities and the

Life Sciences in the field of STEM, the difference in inherent nature of the two disciplines

attracts different primary and secondary audiences that respond differently to varying modes of

argumentation and persuasion. The potency of emotion in the humanities can be compared to the

potency of numerical statistics in STEM. Someone who is the primary audience of the paper on

Life Sciences is more likely to be persuaded by a statistical appeal rather than induced by a call

to credibility presented in the article revolving around Gender and Women's studies; This is by

reason of belonging to or meticulously following a discourse community allows one's brain to

congenitally critically think based on the conventions imposed by the discourse community,

further driving the idea that discourse communities showcase the most significant ramifications

of scriptural differences that contribute to the interpretation of genres among disciplines.

Works Cited

Ann Johns (Philologin. Text, Role and Context : Developing Academic Literacies. Cambridge,

Cambridge Univ. Press, 1997.

Lunsford, Andrea A, and John J Ruskiewicz. Everything’s an Argument. Boston, Bedford/St

Martin’s, 2019.
 Ladann Kiassat 6

Okeke-Ihejirika, Phil E. “Exploring the Experiences of Female Graduate Students in African

Universities: Questions about Voice, Power, and Responsibility.” Rivera Publications,

2019.

Wietsma, Ashley C. “Barriers to Success for Female Physicians in Academic Medicine.”

Journal of Community Hospital Internal Medicine Perspectives, vol. 4, no. 3, Jan. 2014,

p. 24665, 10.3402/jchimp.v4.24665. Accessed 16 Aug. 2020.