Suggestions:
- When choosing articles to conversationalize, it usually works best to find a set that disagree with each other but are not dismissive of each other. Frequently, this means finding authors who are on the same “side” of an issue, but have different solutions to offer, or think different aspects of the issue are more urgent, or possibly more important, than other people in the same “camp.” If you do decide to use some articles that target an opposing “camp,” there is a greater burden on you to turn it into a conversation.
- Remember that Stasis Theory is designed to help you find gaps in the conversation, places where your interlocutors are talking past one another (because they are out of stasis). These gaps provide opportunities for you to contribute something to the conversation—your argument can help fill the gap.
- Though Stasis is your focus, keep in mind the other rhetorical concepts we’ve discussed so far; they can help you see and articulate the complexities of your debate. For instance, maybe you notice a pattern where articles use a chaotic event as their exigence tend to make conjectural claims, while those that establish exigence with more thinky, “I wonder…” types of questions end up making definitional claims more often. Or you might see stasis similarities among those who target similar audiences. And so on.
Sample Solution
