Heather, Jacob, Travis, and Andrew: A Round Table Disucssion

We spent 45 minutes discussing these texts and found quotes and paraphrases based on a variety of topics. We came together to create this table. We attempted to establish a metavocubulary and a list of key points to better discuss these theorists in depth. This table represents some of the conversation we had. We felt a table format best presented the four of our voices as we attempted to put the texts in conversation. In retrospect, we wished we’d made an audio recording of our session and used that to represent us instead. 

Differences
Topic	Weaver	Richards	Overlap
Rhetoric	Incites, causes, leads to action, is where literature and politics intersect (1360), is advisory (1355), pushes toward good, perhaps changes soul/person/humanity, focuses on the “particular and concrete” (1353). All utterances are attempts at “affecting one another for good or ill” (1360).	Discourse is multifaceted: “persuasion is only one among the aims of discourse” (1281); Rhetoric serves  to make meaning, does not always include action, rhetoric is a small part of discourse, and invites scientific inquiry into how words work (1281).	Both theorize that a rhetor asks an audience to agree with or accept the reality being presented in a rhetorical act.
Science	Challenges scientistic and scientific explanation for the nature of man indicating that emotions are outside the scope of logical inquiry and are an essential part of the human experience (1352-1353).	Scientific language is concrete and outside the scope of rhetorical practice (1277).
Metaphysics	Rhetoric creates a chain of being with a “master link” (1370).	--
Meaning, Semiotics & Thingness	Ontological emphasis implies that there is a strong correlation between an object and the idea of an object; there is a nature of a thing that can be captures or defined (1354). Words and objects are objectively correlated. Symbolism is transcendent. Interpretation relies on previous experiences but is also guided by good, ideal truth, nature, and the metaphysical (1360).	The referent and the word are separated, reliant on audience experiences for interpretation (1275). There is no objective correlation. The relationship between a word and a thing is symbiotic – both can change and are reliant on one another (1275).
Similarities
Contested Neutrality of Language	Impossible that words, language, and utterances could be considered neutral; speech implies and attitude, attitude implies an act, response to a purpose creates tendency (1359). Language is “subjectively born, intimate, and value-laden” (1359) Language is closely related to rhetors’ purposes and goals. Weaver allows that definitions may be less value laden and may be more concrete than other forms of argumentation. Language is inherently sermonic (1360).	Language is an “instrument for the promotion of purposes” (1277). Words are instruments (1274). Occasion and context shape language but are more closely related to text than social factors. Richards allows that exposition may be less value laden than other forms of argumentation
Analogy	Analogy is a comparison of things wherein everything is similar to everything else, used to “[hint] at an essence which at this moment cannot be produced” (1356).	Word serves as an analogy to an object. Referent and word are indirectly linked through the rhetor’s meaning making and the audience’s meaning making. Words stand in for the things, but are not representative of things (1284). Words can have multiple simultaneous meanings (1286).
Cause and Effect	Cause and effect is devoid of reference and lends itself to senstation, rather than rational, statements. It is merely a perceived relationship between two objects (1356).	Cause and effect are often mislabeled or lead to nonsequiturs.