Stasis as Hybrid

Fulkerson exploration of stasis theory as related to the teaching of composition was interesting and useful. Formal logic is better suited to examining things that might really have a conclusion, something like a math equation. In real practice, the things we discuss, whether in written or oral form, do not have precise answers or conclusions: “Writing, . .. always deals with contingent issues, issues in which the evidence will never entail the conclusions.”

The Toulmin Model, like formal logic, has its limitation with regard to usefulness in the teaching of composition. Fulkerson finds faults in the model’s for several reasons. First of all, the model maintains that arguments can be evaluated only with in “a discourse field according to the cannons of that field.” Given this situation, Fulkerson rules it out as being applicable in a freshman composition class, a class that is composed of students from different disciplines. Secondly, the Toulmin Model is a system designed for analyzing arguments “rather than a system for creating them.” Fulkerson thus recommends a third way of teaching argumentative writing skills – a kind of hybrid that comes out of traditional stasis theory with a little bit of Toulmin thrown in. He converts the six parts of the Toulmin Model into a useful heuristic we might do well to bring into the classroom. The heuristic guides the student through the process of creating and evaluating their arguments:
1. What is my claim?
2. What grounds do I have to support it?
3. What statement could warrant my move from the grounds to the claim?
4. How can I back up that warrant?
5. How much must I qualify my conclusion as contingent?
6. What counterarguments that would weaken my conclusion do I need to acknowledge?