We will study the how and why of scientific suasions, with two aimsin mind: firstly, to familiarize you with the issues and literature of rhetorical approaches to science; and, therefore, secondly, to enable you to participate in that literature. 

Evaluation will depend on two components: participation in discussions and a paper of publishable length and quality. The paper will be either a rhetorical analysis of some scientific discourse (in a specific paper, or book, or episode), or a theoretical contribution to the discourse of rhetoricians of science. Collaborations are encouraged, but only with prior approval.

Please keep in mind that this is a seminar: you are expected to take an active role in the course. I will use a merit/demerit policy to evaluate your participation. Merit will be awarded primarily on the quality of participation: asking relevant questions; making relevant observations; complementing or developing someone else's contribution; and generally being a constructive member of the class. Quantity of participation is a positive factor to the extent that lots of quality contributions are preferable to a few quality contributions. Demerit will be assessed reluctantly, and only on the basis of repeated instances. The grounds for the demerit system are: absenteeism (you can't participate if you're not there); whispering or chatting while other people are talking; or making lengthy, unfocused comments that draw away from the general thread of discussion. You will also get credit for completion of small regular assignments (mostly 1p position papers), according to the following scheme:

25 % of your participation mark will come from your active engagement with the issues in the class.

25 % of your participation mark will come from your completion of regular assignments (which will no be graded: you will get 25% for doing them all, 20% if you miss one, 0% if you miss more than one; I'm not kidding). 

The 12 July class will be given over to presentations and responses about paper proposals: You will need to have a firm idea in mind about what you will write on, and you will present it to the class. You will also need to write up that proposal, submitting one copy to me, one to a respondent (I will work up an exchange list the week of 5 July). The respondent will comment on the proposal, offering criticisms and suggestions.

The 19 July class will be given over to progress reports and further discussion of the essays.

Your paper should be an original contribution to the rhetoric-of-science literature: write it with the intent to publish, and when you submit it to me include a memo indicating which journal you think it best suits (and why). I will not accept it otherwise. I'm not kidding.

 3 May

 10 May

 17 May

 24 May

 31 May

 7 June

 14 June

 21 June

 28 June

 5 July

 12 July

 19 July

 26 July

 10 August