Reading nonfiction: rhetoric, founding documents, and reasoning (grade 12) · lesson

Premises about human nature

💡 Founding arguments about government often rest on a premise about human nature, and the design follows from it.

A premise is the starting assumption. Once you know what a writer assumes about people, you can see why they design a system the way they do.

Founding writers argued about how to divide power. For each part of a plan, ask what problem it is meant to prevent.

Look for the sentence after a key line. Writers often explain a striking phrase in the very next sentence.

🧠 Let's work it out

A club writes rules: "Treasurers are only human, so two members must sign every check."

The premise: people can be tempted.
The design: a second signer checks the first.
Ask what the writer assumes about people, then how the rule answers it.

What do you think comes next?

premise: the starting idea an argument is built on
checks and balances: a system where each part of government can limit the others
counteract: to act against and reduce the effect of

Fallacies in modern arguments

💡 A fallacy is reasoning that seems persuasive but doesn't actually support the claim.

A false dilemma pretends there are only two choices when there are more: "Either we ban phones or students will never learn."

An attack on motives (a kind of ad hominem) questions the character of people who disagree instead of answering their point: "Only a coward would vote against this plan."

A bandwagon appeal says to do something because others are doing it: "Every school is going paperless. Don't be left behind." Popularity doesn't prove a policy works.

🧠 Let's work it out

"Either we build the new stadium or our city will die."

Are those really the only two choices? No.
The city could do many other things.
So it's a false dilemma.
Name the fallacy by asking what move the sentence makes instead of giving evidence.

What do you think comes next?

fallacy: a flaw in reasoning
false dilemma: presenting only two choices when more exist
ad hominem: attacking a person instead of their argument
bandwagon appeal: urging people to act because others are

Borrowing a famous frame

💡 Echoing a famous text borrows its authority, so ask what the new writer gains by sounding like the old one.

Writers sometimes model a new document on a famous one, copying its structure and key phrases. Listeners recognize the shape at once.

Changing a few words in a famous line can redirect its whole meaning. Repeated formulas can also be aimed at a new target.

The strategy puts opponents in a bind. If they praise the original principles, they must explain why those principles shouldn't apply to everyone. That's called shifting the burden of proof.

🧠 Let's work it out

Suppose student workers wrote, "We hold these rights to be plain: that all who labor deserve a voice."

Echoing a famous line ties their demand to a principle readers already honor.
To reject it, critics would have to explain why the principle stops short of students.
That's shifting the burden.

What do you think comes next?

burden of proof: the duty to prove a claim
frame: the structure or model a writer builds an argument on
allusion: a reference to a well-known text or event

Why an author includes a detail

💡 Ask what job each detail does in an argument, especially a detail that seems to work against the writer.

Authors choose details for a purpose. A detail about backlash or failure, followed by "But…," usually sets up a contrast with later success.

Ask what the detail does in the argument: does it prove a point, admit a weakness, or make a later point more striking?

🧠 Let's work it out

A history of a bike lane says, "Shop owners petitioned to remove it the first month." The next sentence: "But within five years, the street had the busiest shops in town."

The early protest isn't there to show the lane failed.
It makes the later success more impressive.

What do you think comes next?

setback: a problem that slows progress
backlash: a strong negative reaction