Stasis Theory and Research Practices

A Coursebook for Research Writing 1st

Edition First-Year Rhetoric And Writing
Program
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/stasis-theory-and-research-practices-a-coursebook-fo
r-research-writing-1st-edition-first-year-rhetoric-and-writing-program/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Writing Using Sources for Academic Purposes Theory

Research and Practice Rosemary Wette

https://ebookmeta.com/product/writing-using-sources-for-academic-
purposes-theory-research-and-practice-rosemary-wette/

Rhetoric and Writing First Year 3rd Edition Phillip

Heasley Stacey Johnson Omar Montoya Kacey Ross

https://ebookmeta.com/product/rhetoric-and-writing-first-
year-3rd-edition-phillip-heasley-stacey-johnson-omar-montoya-
kacey-ross/

Powerful Writing Structures Brain Pocket Strategies for

Supporting a Year Long Writing Program 1st Edition
Adrienne Gear

https://ebookmeta.com/product/powerful-writing-structures-brain-
pocket-strategies-for-supporting-a-year-long-writing-program-1st-
edition-adrienne-gear/

Research and Technical Writing for Science and

Engineering 1st Edition Meikang Qiu

https://ebookmeta.com/product/research-and-technical-writing-for-
science-and-engineering-1st-edition-meikang-qiu/
Qualitative Research Writing 1st Edition Lieber

https://ebookmeta.com/product/qualitative-research-writing-1st-
edition-lieber/

English for Writing Research Papers 3rd Edition Adrian

Wallwork

https://ebookmeta.com/product/english-for-writing-research-
papers-3rd-edition-adrian-wallwork/

English for Writing Research Papers 3rd Edition Adrian

Wallwork

https://ebookmeta.com/product/english-for-writing-research-
papers-3rd-edition-adrian-wallwork-2/

The Legal Research and Writing Handbook 9th Edition

Yelin

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-legal-research-and-writing-
handbook-9th-edition-yelin/

Proposal Writing for Business Research Projects 1st

Edition Peter Samuels

https://ebookmeta.com/product/proposal-writing-for-business-
research-projects-1st-edition-peter-samuels/
Stasis Theory and
Research Practices
A Coursebook for Research Writing

First Edition
First-Year Rhetoric and Writing Program
Department of English
University of Colorado Colorado Springs
Catherine Grandorff, Matthew Balk, Michelle Brown, Heather Fester,
Phillip Heasley, Nathan Price, and Andrea Wenker
Copyright © 2020 by First-Year Rhetoric and Writing Program, University of
Colorado Colorado Springs

Copyright © 2020 by Hayden-McNeil, LLC on illustrations provided

Photos provided by Hayden-McNeil, LLC are owned or used under license

Cover Images: Shahril KHMD/Shutterstock.com; Rawpixel/Shutterstock.com;

Light And Dark Studio/Shutterstock.com

All rights reserved.

Permission in writing must be obtained from the publisher before any part of this
work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic
or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by any information stor-
age or retrieval system.

Printed in the United States of America

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

ISBN 978-1-5339-1912-0

Macmillan Learning Curriculum Solutions

14903 Pilot Drive
Plymouth, MI 48170
www.macmillanlearning.com

Montoya 1912-0 W20

Acknowledgments
Acknowledgments and copyrights can be found at the back of the book on page 168,
which constitutes an extension of the copyright page.

Sustainability
Hayden-McNeil/Macmillan Learning Curriculum Solutions is proud to be a part of the larger sustainability initiative of
Macmillan, our parent company. Macmillan has a goal to reduce its carbon emissions by 65% by 2020 from our 2010 base-
line. Additionally, paper purchased must adhere to the Macmillan USA Paper Sourcing and Use Policy.
Hayden-McNeil partners with printers that use paper that is consistent with the environmental goals and values of Macmillan
USA. This includes using paper certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI), and/
or the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC). We also offer paper with varying percentages of
post-consumer waste as well as a 100% recycled stock. Additionally, Hayden-McNeil Custom Digital provides authors with
the opportunity to convert print products to a digital format to use no paper at all. Visit http://sustainability.macmillan.com to
learn more.
 Table of Contents

Introduction: Underground Tunnels, Curiosity, and the Research Process . . . . . . v

Chapter 1. Introduction to Stasis Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Chapter 2. The First Level of Stasis: Conjecture, Category, and Definition . . . .5

Chapter 3. The Second Level of Stasis: Cause and Consequence. . . . . . . . . 19

Chapter 4. The Third Level of Stasis: Questions and Claims about Value . . . . 45

Chapter 5. The Fourth Level of Stasis: Proposal, Policy, and Procedure . . . . 71

Chapter 6. Asking Smart Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

Chapter 7. Selecting, Evaluating, and Documenting Sources . . . . . . . . . . 101

Chapter 8. Putting Sources in Conversation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

Chapter 9. Building a Researched Argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163

iii
Stasis Theory and Research Practices
 iv
Table of Contents
Introduction: Underground Tunnels,
C u r i o s i t y, a n d t h e R e s e a r c h P r o c e s s

Ann N. Amicucci

I bet you’ve had this experience before. You’re lying in bed at night, eyes closed,
starting to drift off to sleep. You’re completely relaxed and cozy—and then you hear
a noise.

Or maybe it’s different for you. Maybe you catch a flash of light out of the corner of
your eye or you feel a breeze when you know there aren’t any windows open.

In any of these scenarios, you go very quickly from being relaxed to being com-
pletely on edge, and questions start running through your mind: What was that? Was
that a person? An animal? Am I in danger? Was it just a creak in the walls of the
building? Is it nothing to worry about? Was it the weather or something happening
outside? Should I do something?

All of the questions running through your mind in that moment are what research-
ers call a heuristic (the “heur” part of that word rhymes with “cure”). A heuristic
is a process researchers go through to figure something out—a series of steps we
follow to arrive at a conclusion—and this process often takes the form of a series of
questions.

Take that unusual thing you hear or see or feel in the dark. First, you need to figure
out what it is. Once you know what it is, you need to know where it’s coming from
and what caused it. Next, you need to know if things are okay and if it’s a reason
to be alarmed. You can only decide what to do about it once you know everything
about what’s happened. A process takes place in that moment, even if that process
feels like a crazy rush of questions while your heart races and you listen or look
around the dark room. In research, a heuristic is that very process of learning ev-
erything you can about a subject so that you can decide what to do about it. Before
you can decide what to research or how to research it, you engage in a process of
inquiry—to find out what you want to find out.

The catalyst for a research heuristic is curiosity. You’re going to hear your research
writing teacher talk a lot about curiosity this semester, and it’s not just because they
like cat jokes. Curiosity is a way of thinking that helps you become a stronger writer
and researcher (Council 4). When you’re curious about a subject, you want to know
everything about it. You want to find legitimate information to help you learn more,
and you want to know what the information on your subject means.

Depending on your past experiences, the word “research” may cause a number of
different reactions for you. My guess is that if you’ve ever researched something you
were genuinely curious to learn about, you have a positive reaction to that word.
Even if you aren’t curious about something to begin with, you can fake it. Since be-
ing curious helps you learn and makes you a stronger writer, you can start asking
questions and digging around a subject, and you’ll soon find that a subject you may
not have cared about to start with now piques your interest. From now on, when
you encounter the word “research,” I want you to think of curiosity.

v
Stasis Theory and Research Practices
 A Story About a College Campus
Let me tell you a story. I went to college at a state university in Ohio, and when I was
a new student, I heard from several people that there was a series of underground
tunnels on campus running below our feet. Winters in Ohio can be brutal, and
they’d say that when we students were trekking to class in the snow, the teachers
got to walk to class through these cushy, heated tunnels underground. I was pretty
sure this whole tunnel thing was just a myth.

Then in my sophomore year, a construction project was underway right in front of

my dorm. From a distance, we could see large holes cut into the ground, and one of
my friends had the idea that if we explored the construction site, we might find the
underground tunnels. I laughed but figured it couldn’t hurt to check.

Three of us crept onto the construction site at night with one small flashlight among
us. On one side of the construction site, we could see all the residence halls with
rooms lit up and shadows of people in them. On the other side, the library stood
tall and dark, shut down for the night, with the university center also dark next to
it. The construction site was completely silent except for an occasional giggle (that
was me).

We got to one of the holes we’d seen from far away, and it was huge, with a ladder
descending into the dark. The tiny flashlight showed us there was a dirt floor at the
bottom of the ladder, so we climbed down one by one. And you know where we
found ourselves? Inside an honest-to-goodness underground tunnel.

We walked in a tight line, the guy with the flashlight in front and the other two of
us clinging to the edges of his shirt in the dark. The flashlight was nearly useless,
but he swung it around wildly to make sure we weren’t going to run into anything
weird. It wasn’t the cushy heated tunnel of campus lore, but it was huge: a good
four feet wide and tall enough to stand in. The floor and walls and ceiling were all
dirt. We walked in fits and starts, tripping over the ground and each other. We had
no idea where it led, no idea what creatures might be down there, and no idea what
the consequences would be if we got caught.

We walked for about ten minutes, and then we got to a door. I’m not sure what we
felt exactly. Relief? Disappointment? The guy in front pushed open the door, and
we found we were inside a building. Suddenly the fear of getting caught trespassing
became real, and we stayed silent as we worked our way out of the building in the
dark. Outside, we saw we’d been in a classroom building, though one none of us
had been in before. What was more, we were pretty close to where we’d started:
only a five-minute walk from the construction site and our dorm, even though it had
taken us a long time to creep across that distance underground. We didn’t say much
about the experience to other people—we were afraid of getting in trouble—but
one thing did change. Any time we heard other students talking about the myth of
underground tunnels, we’d say, yep, those really exist.

vi
Introduction: Underground Tunnels, Curiosity, and the Research Process
What You’ll Find in This Book
You might have a few questions about my tunnel story. You might wonder if I made
it up. (No, that really happened.) You might wonder if I’ve told you the story to
encourage you to break into construction sites. (Definitely not. Please don’t. I’m
lucky none of us got hurt.) I’ve shared my story about the tunnel to show you that
curiosity is foundational to good research.

It’s likely you have some questions about the story’s details: what university was it?
What were the tunnels used for? How big does an underground space have to be to
count as a “tunnel”? Do you have secret passageways at your school that only some
people know about? All these are questions of fact and definition, which you’ll learn
about in this book.

The first five chapters of this book focus on stasis theory, which is a research heu-
ristic: a process of steps to follow to conduct solid research that other people will
recognize as credible. You’ll use stasis theory to structure your research process in
this class, and stasis theory will also provide a framework for research you do in
any academic discipline and in contexts outside of college. At the level of fact and
definition, researchers figure out what something is, what category it belongs into,
and how to define it.

Let’s say you got the facts and definitions related to my tunnel story down. Next,
you’d start asking why: Why is the tunnel there? Who built it? How has the tunnel
changed the land around it? These are questions of cause and consequence, the sec-
ond level of stasis theory. At this level, researchers figure out a chain of events, such
as what has led to an occurrence and what will happen because of that occurrence.
What’s important to know here is that you can’t move on to the cause and conse-
quence level of a stasis heuristic until you’ve answered your questions at the facts
and definition level. In fact, you can’t move on to any level of your stasis heuristic
until you’ve answered questions at the level that comes before it.

Once you’ve defined everything about tunnels and figured out their causes and
consequences, you’d want to know: Is having these tunnels below campus a good
thing? Asking that would make you think about all the people involved: who are the
tunnels good for? In what ways are the tunnels harmful—if not to people, perhaps
to animals or organisms living below ground, to the air and soil, or to artifacts left
below the ground from previous civilizations? The third level of the stasis heuristic
is evaluation. At this level, you’ll investigate whether something is good or bad or
ethically right or wrong or somewhere in between.

Only after you go through all these levels—answering questions of fact and defini-
tion, of cause and consequence, and of evaluation—can you move to the final stage
of stasis theory: procedure and policy. At this stage of your research heuristic you’ll
finally be able to ask of a subject, what should we do about it? Along the way, as
you work through those stasis heuristic levels, you’ll draw on several other research
abilities.

vii
Stasis Theory and Research Practices
 What I’ve described so far in this section are the four levels of stasis theory, which
you’ll learn about in the first half of this book. You’ll read four other chapters in the
second half of the book, and these chapters are equally important to your research
process. In these chapters, you’ll learn how to 1) ask strong research questions, 2)
engage with a range of credible, relevant sources of information in an ethical man-
ner, 3) enter a research conversation, which means considering how other research-
ers’ perspectives connect with each other and adding your perspective to theirs, and
4) write a cohesive research-based argument out of the evidence you’ve gathered.
It’s likely that you’ve engaged in similar research steps in previous writing courses,
but I encourage you to go into these chapters with an open mind. Recognize that
this material is designed to refine and strengthen your existing research practices so
you can become an even stronger research writer in college and in contexts outside
of your education.

This book was written by faculty who teach research writing courses. These faculty
authors have narrowed down the abilities you need to do effective research writing
in college to eight areas: the four levels of stasis theory and the four chapters on
research questions, sources, research conversations, and research-based arguments.
Because each chapter has a different author, you’ll find the format and tone of each
chapter to be slightly different. We’ve designed the book in this way to expose you
to a range of perspectives on research and to engage your attention as a reader. Your
teacher may assign you to read this book from start to finish, or they might ask you
to read chapters in a different order or read some chapters but not others. Know that
you can also read this book recursively by returning to re-read and revisit materi-
als to learn a concept more deeply or consider it through the lens of your ongoing
experience as a researcher.

Everything this book’s authors have written falls under the umbrella of rhetorical
research, which is research that pays attention to the rhetorical context of a topic
and aims to make things happen in the world. Yep, the point of research is to make
things happen. As you read this book, and as you engage in research for this class, I
challenge you to make your research matter. Resist the temptation to just go through
the motions of your writing and research assignments. Instead, remind yourself that
if you are curious—if you approach research with a desire to discover and learn—
you will not only be excited by the process, you will contribute something important
to the lives of those who read your work.

Going back to the tunnels for a moment, my guess is that if I walked up to you in
public and said, “I want you to do a research project on tunnels,” you would likely
laugh and walk away. You might think tunnels aren’t your thing—they’re related to
civil engineering, and that’s not your major. What’s neat about the tunnel I walked
through, though, is that it was right below my feet all the time. It was an existing
part of my environment that I didn’t know was there. Once I discovered it, I realized
that tunnels connect to many topics and ideas that could lead me to learn a great
deal about the world and about myself.

The tunnels in this essay are a literal topic I’ve described to help you understand
what it means to be curious and ask questions at different stasis levels, but they’re
also a metaphor for research. If you’re willing to be curious, if you’re willing to
engage deeply with a process of investigation, you’ll find that research can lead you
to learn and care about parts of the world you may never have considered before.

viii
Introduction: Underground Tunnels, Curiosity, and the Research Process
Works Cited
Council of Writing Program Administrators, National Council of Writing Program
Administrators, and National Writing Project. Framework for Success in
Postsecondary Writing. CWPA, NCTE, and NWP, 2011, http://wpacouncil.org/
files/framework-for-success-postsecondary-writing.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2019.

ix
Stasis Theory and Research Practices
 x
Introduction: Underground Tunnels, Curiosity, and the Research Process
 Chapter
Introduction to Stasis
Theory

Catherine Grandorff
1
“For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delu-
sion, however satisfying and reassuring.” —Carl Sagan (6)

What Is Stasis Theory?

You may have heard the word theory before, though perhaps not preceded by stasis.
This compound term stasis theory may seem intimidating in its unfamiliarity, but
we can break it down to make it more manageable. First, we’ll review what we
mean by theory and subsequently consider the word stasis before diving into a his-
tory and overview of stasis theory and the concepts it encompasses.

A theory is a collection of ideas that sets out to explain something. Theories are
prominent across almost all academic fields. You may have heard of Charles Darwin’s
theory of evolution, for example, or Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity. Just like the
respective fields of biology and physics in these examples, rhetoric also has various
theories associated with it.

According to rhetorician George A. Kennedy, stasis “literally means ‘stand, stand-

ing, stance,’ [it] describes the ‘stance’ of a boxer toward an opponent, and perhaps
was transferred from that context to the stand taken by a speaker toward an oppo-
nent” (98). For our purposes, we can think of stasis as a rhetorical struggle, tension,
or point of disagreement.

Stasis theory, then, is a rhetorical theory that sets out to explain how we can work
through rhetorical struggles systematically.

Rhetorical historians have credited ancient Greek philosophers Aristotle and

Hermagoras, and, later, Roman philosophers Quintilian and Cicero with developing
a series of questions as a means of working through such rhetorical problems, or the
stases (plural). Each level must be addressed before proceeding to the subsequent
one. Notice how in Figure 1-1, the pyramid features four blocks representing the
four levels of stasis, or types of arguments. Each previous level serves as a founda-
tion for higher levels.

1
 4th Arguments of proposal, policy,
LEVEL and procedure

3rd Arguments of values and

LEVEL evaluations

2nd Arguments of causes and

LEVEL consequences

1st Arguments of conjecture,

LEVEL definitions, and categories
©Hayden-McNeil,
McNeil, LLC

Figure 1-1. The levels of stasis.

In Rome, this series of questions contributed to the judicial system. For example, in a
robbery case, one must first prove that a robbery occurred (a question of existence),
and caused harm (a question of cause and effect), which was negative (a question of
evaluation), before determining what sentence the accused should serve (a question
of policy). While variations exist, Table 1-1 provides a series of questions that reflect
the spirit of the stases.

Table 1-1. Questions Associated with Each Stasis Level

Level Common Names Description Example

First level of Arguments of Questions of existence, Diversity in higher
stasis conjecture, category, nonexistence; education means a
definition, fact classification of an act, multiplicity of political,
person, or thing geographic, cultural,
intellectual, and
philosophical perspectives.
Second level Arguments of cause, Questions of an When diversity is present
of stasis effect, consequence act/person/thing’s in institutions of higher
causes, effects, and education, the result
consequences is a better learning
environment for all
students.
Third level of Arguments of value, Questions regarding the Diversity is an important
stasis evaluation, quality quality or morality of the and positive value for
act/thing institutions of higher
education.
Fourth level Arguments of proposal, Questions pertaining All institutions of higher
of stasis policy, procedure, to issues of policy, education should foster
jurisdiction procedure, or jurisdiction diversity.

2
Chapter 1
Why Is It Useful to Learn About Stasis Theory?
Stasis theory encourages curiosity, a habit of mind that can help foster knowledge
in any number of realms. This can be useful in scientific, artistic, philosophic, and
even practical contexts. The quote from American astrophysicist Carl Sagan at the
beginning of this chapter speaks to the importance of this mental exercise: Through
curiosity and seeking answers to questions, we can discover answers that bring us
closer to actual and greater understanding, rather than remaining in the dark, or
assuming we know a truth when we do not.

In academia, the process that stasis theory offers can be especially useful because
it provides a clear method for research and writing. When conducting research, we
consume ideas that others have forwarded. Stasis theory provides a helpful frame-
work for this task as it encourages us to break down information into the stases
and consider that information bit by bit. Taking on an entire topic at once can be
overwhelming; stasis theory offers a series of questions to systematically engage an
issue step-by-step.

When crafting a claim, we act as producers, creating arguments for others to engage.
Stasis theory can help writers by acting as a scaffold for building a claim to ensure
that it has a solid structure.

Looking Through the Stasis Lens

Using stasis theory as a “lens” or a filter, we can engage almost any issue with illumi-
nating questions. Consider your sunglasses: If you are looking at Pikes Peak and you
slide on your shades, you are still looking at the same landscape, but the way you
see it—such as how you see the colors and the brightness—changes and allows you
to see the same thing in a new way. The same is true when we apply a theoretical
“lens” like stasis theory. The way that we look at an issue changes, allowing us to see
that issue differently.

Imagine, for example, that you are interested in learning more about humor as thera-
py. If you are wearing a stasis lens, you would “see” the various questions associated
with each level of stasis. That lens would allow you to see a series of questions that
could be connected to the topic, such as:

1. Has humor been used as therapy? When? Where? How has humor been defined
in a healthcare or therapeutic context?

2. What effects has humor had on therapy?

3. Have those effects been positive or negative? What programs have been success-
ful or unsuccessful?

4. How should humor be applied in therapy sessions?

With the lens of stasis theory in place, you would view topic with both curiosity and
the beginning of how to structure that curiosity. Notice how each numbered ques-
tion above builds on the inquiries that precede it.

3
Introduction to Stasis Theory
 Another way to think about a topic like the previous one is as a puzzle: Each ques-
tion and its subsequent answer(s) help us to understand an issue more completely,
just as each puzzle piece allows us to see the picture more wholly. Stasis theory of-
fers a plan for organizing the “puzzle pieces” of information we encounter on a topic
and for completing the “puzzle” systematically, section by section, stasis level by
stasis level, of whatever topic we might engage. This process helps us to “grasp the
world as it truly is” (Sagan 12) rather than guess or assume based on bias or hearsay.

As you progress through the next four chapters, consider how each level of stasis
might illuminate a part of topic you care about. Curiosity is the fuel; stasis theory is
your vehicle. Combined, they will help drive your further development as a thinker,
a reader, and a writer.

Works Cited
Kennedy, George A. A New History of Classical Rhetoric. Princeton UP, 1994.

Sagan, Carl. The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark. Random
House, 1997.

4
Chapter 1
 Chapter

2
The First Level of Stasis:
Conjecture, Category, and
Definition

Catherine Grandorff

In The Cosmic Connection, American astrophysicist Carl Sagan famously claims that
“[t]he nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the car-
bon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of
star stuff” (190). This statement is one example of a first-level argument.

The night before Martin Luther King, Jr., was assassinated, the Civil Rights leader
argued in favor of an idea forwarded in earlier years by leaders like Malcolm X. He
states in his speech “I Have Been to the Mountain Top”:

[W]e are poor people, individually we are poor when you compare us with white
society in America. We are poor. Never stop and forget that collectively, that
means all of us together, collectively we are richer than all the nations in the
world, with the exception of nine. Did you ever think about that? After you leave
the United States, Soviet Russia, Great Britain, West Germany, France, and I
could name the others, the American Negro collectively is richer than most na-
tions of the world. We have an annual income of more than thirty billion dollars
a year, which is more than all of the exports of the United States and more than
the national budget of Canada. Did you know that? That’s power right there, if
we know how to pool it. (216)

King provides several instances of first-level claims that we will consider in this
chapter.

What Are Arguments of Conjecture, Category,

and Definition?
Both of the quotes at the beginning of this chapter offer examples of what arguments
can look like at the first level of stasis. Notice how they make rhetorical moves to
shape their respective conversations: Sagan makes the claim that humans and their
surroundings are the same as cosmic giants; King argues that Black Americans, al-
though poor individually, command significant capital collectively and that there
is power in that collective. These are foundational claims that provide answers to
questions of existence, category, and definition. Such questions that first-level claims
can engage include:

5
 % Is something possible?

% Did something happen?

% What happened?

% Is there a problem?

% What is the problem/issue?

% What kind of a problem/issue is it?

% What is the nature of the thing?

% To what larger class of things or events does it belong?

% How do we define this thing/problem/issue?

4th
4th
h Arguments of proposal, policy,
LE
EVEEL
EV E and procedure

3rd
3rd
d Arguments of values and
LE
EVEEL evaluations

2 d
2nd Arguments of causes and
LEVEL
LEVE consequences

1st Arguments of conjecture,

LEVEL definitions, and categories
©Hayden-McNeil,
McNeil, LLC

Figure 2-1. The levels of stasis.

We can break these questions into three primary categories: conjectural claims, cat-
egorical claims, and definitional claims.

Why Is It Useful to Learn About Conjectural,

Categorical, and Definitional Arguments?
First-level arguments push us to consider what we think we know with fresh eyes.
Things we take for granted (e.g., how we define war or the “fact” that ancient Rome
collapsed) can be questioned and considered anew through arguments of conjecture,
category, and definition. Sagan’s quote at the beginning of this chapter offers an ex-
ample: He argues that the universe is not a bunch of rocks light-years away. Rather,
we are connected at a cellular level with the cosmos. What a profoundly different
way of thinking about “star stuff”!

6
Chapter 2
This first level of stasis is essential for arguments at all levels of stasis, as it provides
the foundation for discussion. It would, for instance, be incredibly difficult to argue
that something should be done about prison reform if the definition of that phrase is
not clear first. King’s quote pushes his audience to redefine their idea of themselves:
from individually powerless to collectively powerful. It’s a crucial step to his pro-
posal claim that they should use that power.

Many contentious debates occur because this first level of stasis is not addressed
before moving on to later levels. For example, consider the cultural conversation
about abortion rights. What constitutes a right? How do we define an abortion—as “a
medical termination of a pregnancy,” as a “murder,” or some other way? These ques-
tions can also have significant consequences for later levels of stasis, and trouble
arises when they are left unfinished before moving on, for instance, to discussions
of right and wrong (quality, the third level of stasis) or what should be done (policy,
the fourth level of stasis). By fully exploring and establishing the first level of stasis,
claims at higher levels of stasis can have a stronger rhetorical foundation.

Identifying Arguments at the First Level of

Stasis
Arguments that engage the first level of stasis will typically answer the questions
like those that appear at the beginning of this chapter. From here, we will break
down those questions in order to further examine the ways these kinds of arguments
can manifest. The following represent various kinds of first-level arguments.

Arguments of Conjecture
Answers to questions about existence or nonexistence help us to establish basics and
are therefore sometimes referred to as arguments of conjecture or arguments of
fact. Notably, arguments of fact should not be confused with the common use of
“fact.” Rather, arguments of fact is a distinct term that denotes someone making a
claim about the existence or nature of a thing that they subsequently support and that
others might disagree with. It does not mean someone is “just stating a fact,” and
thus, you should not necessarily accept such an argument at face value or as an im-
mutable truth. For instance, suggesting the existence of a problem like “a crisis at the
U.S./Mexico border” would be an example of an argument of fact.

Understanding Conjectural Arguments

% Is something possible?

% Did something happen?

% What happened?

% What is the problem/issue?

Journalists are known for asking key questions: “Who? What? When? Where?” The
answers to such questions are the concern of conjectural arguments. People often
have differing accounts of “What happened?” Conjectural arguments aid in the

7
The First Level of Stasis: Conjecture, Category, and Definition
 process of figuring that out. News stories and history books feature arguments for
what constitutes the reality of reported events, and different writers of such pieces
might interpret events differently and therefore make different arguments. Evidence
for such arguments includes supporting details like quotations, interviews, photo-
graphs, or videos.

Figure 2-2 provides an example of such evidence, with The Daily Show with Jon
Stewart correspondent Jessica Williams reporting in front of a pool about a 2015
McKinney, Texas, pool party incident. In this segment, Williams first makes a conjec-
tural claim that an event occurred. Specifically, she argues that a police officer was
caught on camera slamming a teenage girl into the ground and then pointing his gun
at unarmed teen boys who rushed to her aid. To support this explicit claim, she
offers an overview of what happened as well as official statements.

She also implicitly claims the situation is absurd. To support this implicit claim,
she places herself at the “scene” of the pool, and she features a wardrobe choice of
a bulletproof vest under a bikini. This combination speaks to both her conjectural
claim about what happened, and the argument about the absurdity of the situation.

Figure 2-2. Still image from The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (“Assault”).

Questions of Existence
% Is there a problem?

% What exists or doesn’t exist?

Conjecture also encompasses the question of existence, another potential point of

contention or disagreement at the first level of stasis. Some instances center on
folkloric figures, like “is the Loch Ness monster real?” The answers to such a question
would serve as an example of a conjectural argument.

8
Chapter 2
More serious iterations might engage important cultural topics. A sociologist could
argue for the existence of systemic racism, or a Women’s Studies expert might forward
a claim that our culture has a problem with sexual assault and harassment. These argu-
ments demonstrate how conjectural questions and different answers can give rise to
claims and conversations at this first level of stasis.

Evidence for claims of existence varies but usually involves concrete examples.
Figure 2-3 offers a diagram that serves as part of an argument for the existence of a
“ladder” of racial and gender supremacy. This image provides various examples or
“steps” as a means of backing up that claim.

Genocide
Ladder of Racial and Gender Supremacy • Systemic murder
(e.g., the Rwandan
Acts of Violence Genocide against
the Tutsi, Twa, and
• Hate crimes Hutu people)
• Lack of prosecution • State sanctioned
Calls for for perpetrators for murder (e.g., the
Violence crimes like Wounded Knee
• Inciting harm domestic violence Massacre)
Discrimination against a person or or harm towards
group people of color
• Racial profiling
• Online or offline
• Not hiring
Veiled Racism threats
someone due to
and Sexism pregnancy or • Use of charged
•Victim blaming parent status language or slurs
Minimalization like the n-word
•Tokenism
• Denial of existence
•Bootstrap theory
of race or gender
Indifference issues

• Apoliticism • False equivocation

• Passivity or silence
as response to racist
or sexist practices
or policies

Figure 2-3. Levels of racial and gender supremacy, with descriptions and examples.

Arguments of Category
Answers to questions about how we conceptualize a thing are known as categorical
arguments. They provide a way of understanding the person, thing, or act, some-
times by putting it into a category or class. For example, in defining a banana, we
might in part classify it as a fruit, a category that encompasses several other things as
well. Or, to take another example, consider the role of America’s Founding Fathers;
while they came to be known as heroes, the British government at the time consid-
ered many of them to fall in the category of criminals. The categories to which these
men belonged would be a point of stasis, or rhetorical disagreement.

9
The First Level of Stasis: Conjecture, Category, and Definition
 Understanding Categorical Arguments
% What kind of a problem/issue is it?

% To what larger class of things or events does it belong?

Categorical arguments concern themselves with answering questions about catego-

rization or classification. On occasion, these may participate in labeling a person,
thing, or act. Some examples are provided in Table 2-1.

Table 2-1. Chart of Categorical Claims

Person, Thing, Category, Categories,

Claim
or Act or Label(s)
The mass shooting at PULSE, a gay night The mass shooting An act of domestic
club in Orlando, FL, in 2016, “could definitely at PULSE, a gay night terrorism
be classified as domestic terrorism” said club in Orlando, FL, in
Sheriff Demings (Grimson et al.). 2016
Textiles like embroidery and crochet are Textiles like Craft, not fine art
commonly associated with women, and embroidery and
widely considered “craft,” not “fine art” (“A crochet
Brief History”).
The Heritage Foundation is a conservative The Heritage A conservative thinktank
thinktank. Foundation
Many argue that “Prince was a musical Prince A musical genius
genius” (Marchese).

When there is no disagreement regarding the definition of the category, these argu-
ments may feature a relatively straightforward characteristic-match structure.
This structure sets up certain features, or characteristics, and then demonstrates
how the act or thing in question matches those characteristics. In other words, does
the person, thing, or act qualify for inclusion in that category, or not? The answer to
such a question would constitute a categorical claim.

The last example in Table 2-1 considers if Prince should be placed in the category of
“musical genius.” Music critic David Marchese argues in “Everyone Is Saying Prince
Was a Musical Genius. Here’s Why” that Prince did belong in this category, because
he possesses a number of associated characteristics, including (1) his mastery of
diverse songwriting techniques, (2) the wide scope of his industry involvement, (3)
his ability to craft catchy tunes, and (4) his advanced skill with a number of instru-
ments. The four reasons listed provide the criteria that the person/thing/act in ques-
tion must meet for this categorical claim to work. Examples of how he meets each
further strengthen Marchese’s original claim.

10
Chapter 2
Table 2-2. Example of Characteristic-Match Argument Structure

Characteristics of a “Musical Genius” Prince (according to Marchese)

Mastery of diverse songwriting techniques 9

Wide scope of industry involvement 9

Ability to craft catchy tunes 9

Advanced skill with a number of instruments 9

Table 2-2 shows an example of characteristic-match structure. According to the char-

acteristics provided, who else might qualify for the category of “musical genius”?

A common pitfall when working with categorical arguments is to pull characteris-

tics from the person or thing, instead of focusing first on the category itself. As you
encounter or craft these claims, first determine the characteristics of the category;
only after this important step can you determine if someone or something fits or not.

Arguments of Definition
When the boundaries of categories in question are unclear, additional information
may be required to achieve stasis. Claims like this are known as definitional ar-
guments. These arguments aim to provide clarity on what a key word or phrase
means. In response to a monthly question and answer session, David Pilgrim, cura-
tor of the Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia, replies:

Can blacks be racist? The answer, of course, will depend on how you define rac-
ism. If you define it as “prejudice against or hatred toward another race,” then
the answer is yes. If you define racism as “the belief that race is the primary
determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce
an inherent superiority of a particular race,” the answer is yes. And if you define
racism as “prejudice and discrimination rooted in race-based loathing,” then the
answer is, again, yes. However, if you define racism as “a system of group privi-
lege by those who have a disproportionate share of society’s power, prestige,
property, and privilege,” then the answer is no. In the end, it is my opinion that
individual blacks can be and sometimes are racists. However, collectively, blacks
are neither the primary creators nor beneficiaries of the racism that permeates
society today.

Notice how Pilgrim first asks a conjectural question about possibility (“Can blacks
be racist?”), then takes a step back to address the boundaries of the term “racist”
more thoroughly. In doing so, he makes a definitional argument for what constitutes
racism.

Definitions can be contentious as well, meaning that not everyone will agree on the
same way of defining a term, idea, or phrase. While looking it up in the dictionary is
one way of crafting a claim for what something means, many other options exist as
well, as we will see later in this chapter.

11
The First Level of Stasis: Conjecture, Category, and Definition
 Understanding Definitional Arguments
% What is it?

% How do we define this thing/problem/issue?

% What is the nature of the thing?

Definitional arguments arise when stakeholders disagree on what is meant by a

category. For instance, in Table 2-1, the term “fine art” could be contentious among
some audiences. What is fine art? Who gets to decide? The confines of the category
may be unclear; in such a scenario, clarification would be necessary before the con-
versation could move forward.

Providing definitional arguments can also help shape what an argument can look
like going forward. Take for example Figure 2-4, which features a scene from the
popular US television show The Simpsons. After a meltdown at the town nuclear
plant, owner C. Montgomery Burns provides an alternative term to define what is
happening: “an unrequested fission surplus.” By defining what happened in a differ-
ent way, Burns can move to change how people think about the incident.

Figure 2-4. Example of an alternate definition from The Simpsons (The Simpsons
1:30–2:00).

Note that an entire argument can be definitional. A hypothetical example would be,
in the fictional instance above, if Burns were to go on to write an essay or series of
tweets defining “an unrequested fission surplus” and arguing that the meltdown fits
this definition. However, definitional arguments can also support a larger claim. In
such cases, writers have several options about how to integrate definitions. The next
section details some of these choices.

12
Chapter 2
Strategies to Define
Numerous methods exist to define a term. Table 2-3 provides a selection of some
techniques an author can use to shed light on what a concept means, especially in
an effort to support a larger claim.
Table 2-3. Strategies for Defining Terms, adapted from Jeanne Fahnestock and Marie
Secor (148–57)
Description
Strategy
The term in question is:
Synonym followed by a term, idea, or
phrase with a similar, but
more familiar meaning.
Example clarified through a
recognizable example for
the audience.
History defined by relating to the
history of the thing.
Etymology broken into its meaningful
parts (such as syllables)
so linguistic roots can be
traced.
The negative used to eliminate
competing definitions by
stating what the term is not. age or from a certain
Figurative compared to something
language unlike itself using creative
interpretation.
The First Level of Stasis: Conjecture, Category, and Definition
Additional
Example
Information
King argues, The synonym
“Collectively…all of definition is bolded
us together, [Black for emphasis.
Americans]…are richer
than all the nations
in the world, with the
exception of nine.”
An entrepreneur is Sometimes further
someone like Oprah background is
Winfrey, who turned her helpful, as with the
journalism career into a phrase that follows
media empire. “Oprah Winfrey” in
the example.
The guillotine, with its These are most
heavy metal blade, was useful when defining
a popular execution words that audiences
tool during the French may not understand
Revolution. without historical
context.
The word republic comes This strategy
from the Latin words provides clarity
res meaning “things or especially for
matters” and publica, concepts that may
meaning pertaining to have morphed over
“the people.” From its the years.
roots, it means “Matters
of/for the people.”
An antique is not Very similar are
something of a certain contrast definitions,
or when the writer
era. clarifies two terms
that are similar
enough to confuse
the reader. For
instance, “By frugal, I
don’t mean stingy.”
The United States can These definitions can
be thought of as a salad provide particularly
bowl, with distinct memorable
cultural components. meanings.
13
 Description Additional
Strategy Example
The term in question is: Information
List employed to indicate a The Beatles included This is also known
limited group. John Lennon, Paul as an ostensive
McCartney, George definition.
Harrison, and Ringo
Starr.
Operation limited to a specific context. Who qualifies as a child? This is a popular
A theme park might strategy in the
define the term by a set hard sciences but
height, while the Motion useful in everyday
Picture Association of conversations as
America says anyone well.
under 17 qualifies.
Denotation defined using a dictionary Merriam Webster While often
entry. defines feminism as “the presented as
theory of the political, reference texts,
economic, and social dictionaries offer
equality of the sexes” a long series of
(“Feminism”). definitional claims
which can be and
are challenged and
changed.
Comparison, used to establish likeness Judaism, Christianity, The less obvious
Resemblance, or distinction. and Islam all claim the likeness or
or Contrast Abraham as their difference, the more
ancestor. evidence one will
require.

As Table 2-3 suggests, many options exist for defining a term. When you are reading
or listening to someone making a definitional claim, pay attention to which strategy
or strategies they employ. Is it the best one?

Likewise, when you find yourself making such an argument, consider your choices
carefully. What strategy would be most effective for your audience and your pur-
pose? Being cognizant of these rhetorical choices will position you to be a savvier
listener and a more successful rhetor than if you were to ignore such questions
altogether.

14
Chapter 2
Critically Reading Conjectural, Categorical, and
Definitional Arguments
Healthy skepticism can serve you well at every level of stasis, including this first
one. Below are some questions you should pose as you approach arguments engag-
ing the first level of stasis. Answering them will serve as a first step in analysis.

Audience Support Terms Counterclaims

Who is the text’s What examples does What terms and How does the text deal
intended audience? the text offer? definitions does the with counterclaims?
author present?

How do What is How do they How could they What Which ones
you know? the text’s support the undermine counterclaims do they not
Are there No definitions?
purpose? purpose of the purpose of does the text address?
different What terms
the text? the text? possible does the author anticipate and
definitions for assume we address directly?
those terms? agree upon?
How do Is the claim
you know? conjectural, How could How could
categorical, or Is this helpful or How could you
you challenge you
definitional? detrimental to push back
the strengthen
the point being against the
examples? them?
made? text’s claim?

How do What comparisons does the Would they be

you know? text draw? Are there any better or worse
issues with the comparisons for this
(e.g., are the things being argument? Why?
compared actually
comparable, or are they too
different)?

Figure 2-5. Flowchart to explore texts at the first level of stasis.

15
The First Level of Stasis: Conjecture, Category, and Definition
 Writing Conjectural, Categorical, and
Definitional Arguments
Like any claim, first-level arguments should take their audience into consideration.
The questions in Table 2-4 that follows serve as a starting place for you to think
about your topic, audience, and rhetorical situation so that you can develop a strong
first-level claim. The order is a suggestion; often, the writing process does not follow
a straight line, but, rather, loops back before moving forward.

Table 2-4. Tips for Research: Considering Topic, Audience, and Rhetorical Situation

Questions Actions and Suggestions Example

What subject would Write as many down as possible,
benefit from your then consider which you would
exploration? be most interested in diving into
further.
What first-level For instance, does it exist, or did
questions could it happen? What category could it
someone ask about belong to? How would you define
that subject? it? Start with general inquiries, and
work towards getting more specific.
Once you have a This can function as a tentative
single focused thesis statement.
question, how might
you answer that
question?
How can you clarify Providing clear definitions is an
important terms? important part of a first-level
argument.
What kind of Examples, definitions, and
evidence would be comparisons are all typical
useful in convincing strategies. Some of your research
your audience? will likely counter parts of your
tentative thesis statement. You will
likely want to revise that draft claim
based on your research so that they
don’t contradict each other.
How might you deal Consider those arguments
with counterclaims? that go against your own, or
counterexamples. You may need
to revise your own stance, or you
may not, but addressing these will
strengthen your overall argument
by showing your audience you have
thoroughly considered the subject
from multiple perspectives.
The American Revolution
Who were the key players? What
did they do before, during, and
after the war? How were they
viewed before, during, and after?
Alexander Hamilton was a key
player and a complicated figure in
the American Revolution.
The term “key player” in this
context indicates that his actions
and contributions had significant
impact on the initial formation of
the United States.
One way he contributed during
the war was to serve as General
George Washington’s chief staff
aide. When Washington became
President, Hamilton served as the
first Secretary of the Treasury for
the new United States.
While many consider Hamilton and
others who helped the American
colonists win the American
Revolution to be heroes, during
the war, the British defined them
very differently. According to
that perspective, Washington,
Hamilton, and other “heroes” were
seen as war criminals.

16
Chapter 2
Appendix: Plain Text Questions for Flow Chart
1. How does the text reveal its audience and purpose?

a. Who is the intended audience, and how do you know? How does the lan-
guage the author uses support or contradict who the audience supposedly is?

b. What is the point or purpose of this text in relation to that intended audi-
ence? What parts of the text reveal that purpose?

c. Is the claim conjectural, categorical, or definitional? What parts of the text

indicate that, and how?

2. What examples does the text offer?

a. How do they or don’t they support the purpose of the text?

b. How could they be challenged? Strengthened?

c. What comparisons does the text draw? How are similarities or distinctions
included? Are there any issues with the comparisons (e.g., are the things be-
ing compared actually comparable, or are they too different?)

3. What terms does the author present?

a. How does the text define key terms? Are there different definitions that you
or someone else might offer? What are they, and why would they be better
or worse for this argument?

b. If they don’t define them are they working on previously accepted defini-
tions? Why? Would the argument benefit from more explicit definitions?

4. How does the text deal with counterclaims?

a. What counterclaims does the text anticipate and address directly? What ones
do they not address? What points could be considered weak? How could you
push back against the claims of this argument?

17
The First Level of Stasis: Conjecture, Category, and Definition
 Works Cited
“A Brief History of Women in Art.” Khan Academy, 2019, www.khanacademy.
org/humanities/art-history-basics/tools-understanding-art/a/a-brief-history-of-
women-in-art. Accessed 21 Sept. 2019.

“Assault Swim—Progress in Community Policing.” The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,
8 June 2015, http://www.cc.com/video-clips/4duydk/the-daily-show-with-jon-
stewart-assault-swim---progress-in-community-policing. Accessed 23 Nov. 2019.

Grimson, Matthew, et al. “FBI says it probed Orlando shooting suspect Omar Mateen
twice.” Domestic Terrorism Leaves Scores Dead and Injured at Orlando Nightclub.
CNBC, 13 June 2016, https://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/12/domestic-terrorism-
leaves-scores-dead-injured-at-orlando-nightclub.html. Accessed 17 Sept. 2019.

Fahnestock, Jeanne, and Marie Secor. A Rhetoric of Argument: A Text and Reader.
McGraw-Hill, 2004.

“Feminism.” Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster. www.merriam-webster.com/

dictionary/feminism. Accessed 21 Sept. 2019.

King, Martin Luther, Jr. “I Have Been to the Mountaintop.” A Call to Conscience: The
Landmark Speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr., edited by Clayborne Carson, IPM/
Warner, 2001, pp. 212–23.

Marchese, David. “Everyone Is Saying Prince Was a Musical Genius. Here’s Why.”
Vulture, 22 April 2016, https://www.vulture.com/2016/04/prince-genius.html.
Accessed 21 Sept. 2019.

Pilgrim, David. “Can Blacks Be Racist?” Jim Crow Museum—Ferris State University.
March 2009. https://www.ferris.edu/HTMLS/news/jimcrow/question/2009/
march.htm. Accessed 21 Sept. 2019.

Sagan, Carl. The Cosmic Connection. Cambridge UP, 2000.

The Simpsons. “Homer Defined Part 02.” 26 Nov. 2018, https://www.yuoutube.com/

watch?v=ojtSRV8QIZ8. Accessed 23 Nov. 2019.

18
Chapter 2
 Chapter
The Second Level of Stasis:
Cause and Consequence

Phillip Heasley
3
Introduction
People have long sought to understand and control the world around them, from
the earliest farmers planting seeds in hopes of a bountiful crop to the new college
student reviewing their notes in order to succeed on a test. A fundamental way of
understanding our world is understanding cause and consequence relationships, the
idea that one thing causes or contributes to another.

Many animals have an intuitive sense of causes and consequences. You may have
seen this when you train a pet; the pet gradually learns that a certain action (lying
down) leads to a reward (a treat). The more times the pet sees this action, the more
the connection between the two events is reinforced. As educated human beings,
we can go beyond our intuition. We can know more than just that there is a relation-
ship. We can understand how and why that relationship works, we can evaluate the
relationship to see how strong or how reliable it is, we can consider and then accept
or discard other potential causes or possible outcomes, and we can investigate how
changes in context or other influence factors may change that causal relationship.

Figure 3-1. Cartoon illustration containing an opinion on causal arguments

(“Reason”).
19
 What Are Arguments of Cause and
Consequence?
Arguments of cause and consequence make claims about the causal relationships
between two or more things. They often claim that one thing does (or does not!)
cause or increase the likelihood of another thing. Persuasive cause and consequence
arguments will support that claim with evidence and reasoning. We sometimes call
these arguments “causal” (related to cause and consequence).

Imagine you are interested in the relationship between eating sugar and gaining
or losing weight. One way to frame that curiosity is to consider it as a cause and
effect question. Does eating more or less sugar (the cause) lead to weight gain or
weight loss (the consequence)? We could gather many kinds of evidence to explore
this question. We could begin with our own experience and consider specific cases
of people we know who have changed their sugar eating habits or who have had
large changes in their weight. We could also start with the big picture by gathering
statistical evidence about sugar in diets and weight changes over time. We could
draw on knowledge from biology and learn about what the body does with sugar,
how it is processed chemically, and how that could influence weight. We could make
a list of other factors that might influence weight loss and or weight gain and then
analyze how eating sugar fits among them. In some cases, we may need to assess
other causal arguments. For instance, companies that sell sugary foods have claimed
for decades that eating fat is the leading cause of weight gain. We can learn about
the evidence used to support that claim and make our own assessment of it. And,
we could gather published sources that try to ask or answer our own question about
sugar and weight change and consider the evidence they provide.

Mack Curtis/Getty Images/iStockphoto

Figure 3-2. Cartoon illustration of a cause and effect sequence (“Fake”).

20
Chapter 3
Why Is It Useful to Learn About Causal
Arguments?
Learning about causal arguments can help us to make more informed choices and
effectively persuade others. Understanding cause and consequence arguments helps
us be more critical in our evaluation of arguments we read or hear. Arguments of
cause and consequence may seem convincing on the surface but turn out to be un-
true with critical examination. Yet, exploring and assessing arguments of cause and
consequence is essential in our daily lives. Choosing what medicines to take, what
schools to attend, and what phone to buy, all hinge on understanding the causes and
consequences affecting those choices. What are the odds the medicine will help, and
what are its possible side effects? What effect will choosing a certain school have on
your career, your happiness, and the happiness of your friends and family? Which
phone is most likely to break? Which will be out of date the soonest? How will the
phone payments affect the rest of your budget?

As you make choices like these, you will develop your own questions and you will
encounter arguments made by other interested parties: your doctor, the company
selling the medicine, your parents, your school counselors, a pushy phone salesper-
son at the mall, or an “impartial” review for a cell phone you read online. Most of
these sources are likely to provide evidence that informs your questions. Many of
them will try to persuade you with their own cause and consequence arguments.
But how do we evaluate these arguments? If the phone salesman gives you different
answers than the review you read about how much your phone will be worth in five
years, how can you decide which argument is more convincing? Learning about the
structure, limitations, and pitfalls common to claims of cause and consequence can
help us make better choices and prevent us from being duped or misled by weak or
invalid arguments.

One central message of this textbook is that the levels of stasis are deeply connected.
Arguments at one level of stasis can support or disprove arguments at a different
level of stasis. Often, causal arguments support claims of evaluation and policy,
which you will learn about in chapters 4 and 5. A common strategy for evaluating
something is to argue that it is bad because it leads to bad consequences. For in-
stance, we might evaluate the design of a new traffic intersection by arguing that it
will lead to more accidents; because the consequence of the intersection is bad, the
design of intersection itself is also bad.

We could also argue for or against a policy based on the consequences we expect. For
instance, raising or lowering taxes on the rich remains a controversial policy around
the world. Some economists and politicians argue that high taxes on the rich is a
good policy. Supporters of high taxes claim that when the government spends those
tax dollars on infrastructure, education, or social programs, it helps the economy on
the whole. However, other economists argue that raising taxes on the rich discour-
ages wealthy citizens from spending or investing their money, and, in the end, this
hurts the economy. In this case, our decisions about tax policy rest in part on our
ability to understand and support arguments about cause and consequence.

21
The Second Level of Stasis: Cause and Consequence
 Identifying Cause and Consequence Arguments
Cause and consequence arguments can be difficult to identify. Some arguments
contain clear language such as “X causes Y.” However, many arguments use more
subtle language to express the nuances of the cause and consequence relationship.
In the claims below, consider the ways that the word choice shows the nature of the
relationships:

1. Violent video games can be a contributing factor in the case of some school
shooters.

2. Before society can become just for all Americans, private for-profit prisons have
to be abolished.

3. Only terrible mothers would expose their children to cancer-inducing plastics

that contain BPA (bisphenol A).

4. Eliminating required boat inspections at the lake will allow thousands of inva-
sive species into our waterways.

5. The bridge can support a maximum weight of 60,000 pounds, well below the
weight of many typical semi-trucks.

All of these sentences are making a cause and consequence argument. In some ex-
amples, like sentence 1, the writer makes an explicit claim, stating their argument
clearly and directly. In other cases, such as sentences 4 and 5, the argument is subtle
or may even be an implicit claim (not stated directly). In many cases, the nature of
the relationship is hinted at by the language. For instance, in example 1, the phrase
“contributing factor” suggests that video games are only one cause among many
causes, and the sentence says that it is only true for “some” shooters. So, the writer
of the sentence is admitting that, for other shooters, video games may not be an
important cause at all. In contrast, in example 2, the writer suggests that we “have
to” enact the cause (ending for-profit prisons), before we can have the consequence
(a just society).

In example 3, the writer is less specific. They argue that plastics with BPA (the cause)
are “cancer-inducing,” so the cause (plastics) and the consequence (cancer) are both
fairly clear. However, the relationship between the two remains somewhat vague.
You may notice that the cause and consequence argument about BPA and cancer is
actually only a part of another argument (evaluating mothers who choose to do this).
As mentioned in the last section, the cause and consequence argument is working as
evidence to support an argument of evaluation. All in single sentence!

In examples 4 and 5, the cause and consequence are not stated as directly. In both
sentences, the reader must use their own critical thinking to infer the claim. In sen-
tence four, the writer focuses on stopping a practice (inspecting boats). The inferred
claim of sentence four is that the inspections (the cause) are currently protecting
the lake from invasive species (the consequence). If someone changes the rules, and
boat inspections aren’t required, the situation will reverse, and invasive species will
increase.

22
Chapter 3
In the final example, the writer never comes out and states the argument explicitly,
but the message they intend is still fairly clear: If a truck weighing over 60,000
pounds drives over the bridge, the bridge may collapse. In the case of example 5, the
sentence is framed as a statement of definition or conjecture. The writer places some
faith in their reader and trusts that they will make the logical leap to the argument
of cause and consequence without needing to be told directly.

We could call this an implicit claim, one that is implied or hinted at but not stated
directly. Implicit arguments are found in many forms of communication. They are
quite common in academic writing, where readers are assumed to be intelligent and
knowledgeable about the subject matter, and where concise writing is valued. These
kinds of implicit arguments can often be hard for writers who are trying to report
on something they read or heard. A writer may spend time looking for the perfect
sentence that states the argument most clearly, but in many cases they will never
find such a sentence because the argument is only made implicitly.

Critically Reading Causal Arguments

Though cause and consequence arguments may appear simple on the surface, after
some analysis they can be surprisingly complex. A vital first step in reading argu-
ments of claim and consequence is to clearly identify the claim made by the author
and any evidence the author provides. Once you have identified the claim and evi-
dence, you can analyze it carefully. When we read or build these arguments, we can
analyze this relationship in many ways:

% The emphasis and direction of the relationship

% The causal mechanisms that connect cause to consequence

% The strength of the relationship

% The reliability of the relationship

% How the relationship changes in different contexts

% What influencing or mitigating factors affect the relationship

Direction and Emphasis of Causal Arguments

Time only moves in one direction (forward), so in our daily lives the cause must
always precede the consequence. However, in exploring a cause and consequence
relationship, the writer can begin by thinking about the consequence first. Take
a moment and consider any famous historical event. That event is likely both a
consequence of earlier events and a cause of later events. As a writer, we must ask
ourselves which is interesting to us in this moment and context. Do we want to un-
derstand the American Civil War as a consequence of disagreements over slavery, or
are we interested in whether the Civil War was the cause of increased poverty in the
American South? In this sense, we must choose a direction for our argument, looking
forward to the consequence or backward to the cause.

23
The Second Level of Stasis: Cause and Consequence
 Many times, cause and consequence arguments are built in such a way, by working
backward or forward from a subject of interest. We are interested in a particular
thing (a rise in home prices, the failure of a local business), and we must choose
whether to look forward or backward. Similarly, effective rhetors make it clear
which of the elements (cause or consequence) are more important or interesting to
them. An educator might begin with an interest in why not all students graduate
from high school. They could then proceed from their subject of interest and argue
that graduation rates will increase if we begin school later in the day. The educator
begins with their subject of interest and moves forward to its consequences.

Alternately, a sociologist might be interested in reasons why children live in poverty.

The sociologist could then look for potential causes of children’s living conditions
and argue that high divorce rates lead to more children in poverty as single parents
struggle to provide for their children. The sociologist begins with their subject of
interest and moves backward to its causes. In both cases, the writer has a primary
focus and then argues about the causes or consequences of that focus. As a reader, it
is important that you can identify when one element (cause or consequence) is more
important to the writer and which it is.

Causal Mechanisms
An important piece of any cause and consequence argument are the causal mech-
anisms that connect the cause to the consequence. You can think of the causal
mechanisms as why or how the cause leads to the consequence. In some cases, ex-
plaining the causal mechanism is the primary focus of the argument. In other cases,
explaining a causal mechanism can be strong evidence to support a cause and conse-
quence argument. Sometimes, the causal mechanism is easily observable or widely
accepted. At other times, the causal mechanism is shrouded in mystery or hotly
contested by experts.

For instance, most people agree that there is an economic “achievement gap” in
American schools: Children from low income families and communities under-per-
form in school compared to middle class or rich students (Yeh 21). Researchers have
been observing this relationship for a long time, so we know a lot about it. We know
that this gap exists, and we can prove with some certainty that the economic differ-
ence is the cause. However, theories abound as to the exact mechanism: Why does
being raised in a low-income family lead to children under-performing in school?
Some experts focus on parents. Do they have time to read to their children? Do they
encourage curiosity? Do they have the education themselves to help their children
learn? Other experts focus on the physical and emotional well-being of the children.
Do they get enough to eat? Do they feel safe in their home? Other experts focus on
schools. Do schools in low income areas have the same quality of teachers? Do they
have enough money for up-to-date books and materials? Many experts think that
all of these mechanisms are important and that they interact with one another in
complex ways.

24
Chapter 3
 Figure 3-3. “Simple Alarm Clock,” a comic illustration of a causal sequence
(“Simple”).

Often, a close examination of the causal mechanism reveals that contained within are
multiple arguments of cause and consequence, as you can see with the alarm clock
in Figure 3-3. In many cases, the causal mechanism is in fact a “chain” of cause and
effect arguments. Low performance on spelling tests is caused by having a smaller
vocabulary. Having a smaller vocabulary can be caused by parents spending less
time reading to their child. Parents may spend less time reading to children because
they are busy working multiple jobs. They may have to work multiple jobs because
they are living in poverty. We may phrase our thesis as “poverty causes lower scores
on reading tests,” but each link in that chain is, in reality, its own smaller cause and
consequence argument.

Philosophers have developed names for these causes based on where they occur in
the chain. The cause closest to the consequence in the chain is called the proximal
cause. In the case of student performance on a spelling test, a small vocabulary
would be the proximal cause for poor scores on the test. The cause that is furthest
away from the consequence in the chain is called the ultimate cause. In this case,
poverty is the ultimate cause for poor test scores. The causes between the proximal
and ultimate cause are called intermediate causes. Figure 3-4 shows a flow chart
for our hypothetical causal mechanism between poverty and spelling tests.

In Figure 3-3, the causal mechanism has even more steps, but the same terms can be
applied. The bird (A) is the ultimate cause. Steps B through M are all intermediate
causes. Certainly, ice water (P) is a proximal cause, but we might even say there are
two proximal causes since both the ice water (P) and the cannon ball (N) seem likely
to achieve the desired consequence (waking the sleeping person).

25
The Second Level of Stasis: Cause and Consequence
 ULTIMATE
CAUSE
INTERMEDIATE
Student is from CAUSE
a poor home.
INTERMEDIATE
Student’s parents CAUSE
must work extra
jobs. PROXIMAL
Parents have less CAUSE
time to read to
student.
Student has
smaller CONSEQUENCE
vocabulary.
Student gets lower
score on spelling
test.

Figure 3-4. Flowchart showing causal chain of events.

In Figure 3-5, the causal mechanism has even more steps, but the same terms can
be applied. The mouse entering the door (A) is the ultimate cause. Steps B through
G are all intermediate causes while launching the rocket (H) is the proximal cause of
our final consequence, flying the mouse to the moon.

Figure 3-5. Comic illustration of a causal sequence (“How”).

26
Chapter 3
Evaluating and Comparing Causes and
Consequence Relationships
As we saw in the example of the educational achievement gap, experts often believe
there is more than one cause for a consequence. When there is more than one cause,
it is only natural for us to ask, which of these causes is the most important? Even
though we are certain that poverty is the ultimate cause, we still want to know more
about the intermediate steps. Educators probably cannot fix poverty. But educators
can create programs and lessons to help students in poverty catch up with richer
students. So where should educators focus? On child well-being? On parents? On
schools? Understanding the cause and consequence relationships allows us to evalu-
ate these choices and consider policies and proposals to help these children, as you
will learn to do in chapters 4 and 5.

When we seek to compare or evaluate possible causes, we often focus on the rela-
tionship between cause and consequence and ask several key questions:

% How reliable is the relationship between cause and consequence?

% How strong is the relationship between cause and consequence?

% Does the relationship exist in different contexts?

% Are there other factors that mitigate or influence this relationship?

Strength of the Cause and Consequence

Relationship
We can begin by asking how strong the relationship is. In the case of the educational
achievement gap, how much better do rich students perform on spelling tests on
average? Does it matter how poor or how rich they are? Do the richest students have
the greatest advantage? If we investigate the influence of being wealthy on spelling
test performance, does wealth have more or less impact on test performance than
other factors like a teacher’s experience or a student’s sex?

You may notice at this point that the notion of definitions and categories described
in chapter 2 becomes extremely important. What is the dividing line between rich
and poor or between poor and middle class? How are we measuring student success:
with standardized tests? With graduation rates? Questions of definition such as these
directly influence the answers we find to questions of cause and effect.

27
The Second Level of Stasis: Cause and Consequence
 Reliability of the Cause and Consequence
Relationship
We can also ask how reliable the relationship is between the cause and consequence.
If a student from a wealthy family takes 100 tests, how often will he do better on the
test than a student from a poor family? 100 times? 80 times? We know that students
from rich families have an advantage on the whole, but how does this translate to in-
dividual students? If we compare 100 poor students to 100 rich students, how many
times will the rich student score better on a third-grade math test? One important
term for talking about reliability is probability. Probability focuses on numbers as
in the case of the 100 pairs of students. If the rich student performs better 90 out of
100 times, we can say it is probable that a rich student will perform higher than a
poor student on a third-grade math test.

As we noted before, word choice becomes quite important when describing a rela-
tionship. Yet, what a particular term means is often open to interpretation. Authors
can also qualify their argument (limit or specify it) with words like should, might,
usually, etc. Consider the list of propositions below. Assuming you trust that the
author is being honest with you, which of these risks would you be most likely to
take? Discuss your answers with other students to see how your interpretation of the
words used may differ.

1. Pot belly pigs can usually be house-trained within a few months.

2. Borrowers who take small business loans over $10,000 are twice as likely to
have a profitable business in two years than those who borrow less, even when
accounting for loan payments.

3. For most students, decreasing their hours of paid work off campus increases
their GPA and improves their odds of graduating in five years.

4. In all likelihood, eating dessert more than once a week will lead to diabetes.

5. Shaving your head can sometimes get you a date.

6. Working at an ice cream parlor often leads to getting free ice cream.

7. The absence of a regular exercise routine is a leading cause of heart attacks.

28
Chapter 3
Necessary, Sufficient, and Contributing Causes
Another way to talk about the strength and reliability of a cause is to classify it as a
necessary cause, a sufficient cause, or a contributing cause. These concepts can
also be called necessary, sufficient, and contributing conditions.

Necessary Causes
When a cause is a necessary cause, it is “necessary” for the cause to occur in order
for the consequence to occur. That is, X must happen in order for Y to happen; Y
only happens after X happens. For instance, there must be light for a plant to grow.
Plants only grow when there is light. So, light is a necessary cause for the conse-
quence of plants growing. However, a necessary cause does not always ensure the
consequence will happen. For plants to grow, they also need nutrients from the soil
and carbon dioxide. Nevertheless, sunlight is necessary for their growth. In terms
of probability, when the necessary cause does not happen, the chance of the conse-
quence happening is 0%. When the consequence happens, the probability that the
necessary cause happened prior to the consequence is 100%.

Sufficient Causes
For a sufficient cause, the consequence always follows the cause, but the conse-
quence could also be caused by something else. If X happens, Y happens. But Y can
happen without X. For instance, if I hit my head hard enough (cause), I will get a
headache (consequence). Any time I hit my head that hard, I will get a headache.
However, there are many other reasons that I might get a headache. I can get a head-
ache without hitting my head. Therefore, hitting my head is a sufficient cause of a
headache but not a necessary cause. In terms of probability, if the sufficient cause
happens, the chance of the consequence happening is 100%. However, if the con-
sequence occurred, the probability that the sufficient cause preceded it is unknown
because any number of other things may have caused the consequence.

Contributing Causes
Often, a number of causes can “add up” and increase the probability of the conse-
quence. For instance, if you choose not to study and also choose to stay up late and
eat junk food, the probability of your failing a test the next day increases. If a student
not only studies hard but also has a teacher with more experience, their probability
of a higher test score will increase. When a cause increases the probability of a con-
sequence, we call it a contributing cause. That is, it contributes to the probability
of the consequence.

Table 3-1 shows some examples of necessary and sufficient causes. As you can see,
sometimes a cause can be both sufficient and necessary (as with the example of the
ice cube in Table 3-1).

29
The Second Level of Stasis: Cause and Consequence
 Table 3-1. Examples of Cause Types

Necessary Cause Sufficient Cause Contributing Cause Consequence

The car has some The other cars all The car has the most A car wins a race.
kind of power source. wreck before finishing aerodynamic design.
the race.
The person is 18 The person submits a The person watches or A person votes legally
years old. legal ballot at a polling reads the news. in a U.S. election.
center.
The student showed The student answered The student studied A student passes a
up for the test. every question hard. test.
correctly.
The temperature is The temperature is The sun is shining. An ice cube melts.
above 32 degrees above 32 degrees
Fahrenheit. Fahrenheit.

Context of the Cause and Consequence

Relationship
An important question for any cause and consequence argument is, In what contexts
is this relationship true? Context is a broad term that many students struggle with.
A simple way might be to think of context as “time and place.”

Considering context also includes comparing the past, present, and future. Perhaps
in the year 1800 having more children raised a family’s economic quality of living
because it meant more people who could earn wages or work on the family farm.
However, in our own time, that may not be true. Perhaps having more children
today means the economic quality of life goes down because each child uses more
of the family’s resources but does not contribute to these resources by working. The
change in context from one time to another changes the nature of the cause and ef-
fect relationship.

Considering the context also means considering the physical location. Many people
have studied the economic achievement gap in multiple states and even in countries
outside the U.S. The education system in Finland is widely respected, and Finnish
students often outperform U.S. students on standardized tests. So, do these same
gaps between rich and poor students exist in Finland? It turns out that, based on
standardized tests, they do. Although students in Finland generally score higher
than U.S. students, the gap between rich and poor students is about the same in
Finland as it is in the U.S. (Carnoy and Rothstein). In this case, we can say that the
cause and consequence relationship is still true in other contexts, or at least in the
context of Finland. Considering the context might also mean thinking of physical
aspects of the location like altitude, distance to the nearest hospital, or even cultural
aspects such as the languages, religions, and beliefs of local people.

The idea of context is quite broad, and many things could be included beyond sim-
ply time and place. For instance, imagine a married couple you know got in an argu-
ment. The context for their argument includes the time and place, but it might also

30
Chapter 3
include things like their personal history, their relationship with in-laws, whether or
not they have children, or what they had for breakfast. The context for a scientific
observation might include the time of day and physical location, but it might also
include the temperature, the amount of light, or the current windspeed at the time
of the observation.

Influencing or Mitigating Factors

A final step in evaluating or comparing a cause and consequence relationship is to
consider other factors that might change the relationship. For instance, how does
the factor of stay-at-home parents affect the cause and consequence relationship be-
tween poverty and education? Families may have lower incomes because one parent
chooses to stay at home and focuses on raising the children. Do children who are
poor but have a stay-at-home parent perform noticeably better than poor children
without a stay-at-home parent? Does this help to close the achievement gap?

When a factor weakens the relationship between cause and consequence, we call it
a mitigating factor. For instance, if a child came from a poor community, but both
her parents were highly educated, we would say that her parents’ education likely
mitigates the influence of being poor. On the one hand, mitigating factors always de-
crease the strength or reliability of the relationship between cause and consequence.
On the other hand, influencing factors could make the relationship stronger, weaker,
more reliable, or less reliable. Considering these influencing or mitigating factors is
an essential step in thinking through any cause and consequence argument.

Understanding Causal Arguments

Causality and Logical Fallacies
Because cause and consequence is such a powerful way of understanding and con-
trolling our environment, philosophers and scientists have been studying causality
for thousands of years. Philosophers study “logical fallacies”—errors of logic or de-
liberate attempts to trick an audience using false logic. Several logical fallacies apply
specifically to cause and effect. Because these logical fallacies were often studied in
the works of Roman philosophers, we still use the Latin names for these fallacies. It
is important to remember that logical fallacies are generally considered bad; intel-
ligent rhetors try to avoid them whenever possible.

One of the most well-known logical fallacies focuses on mistaking cause and conse-
quence for the order of events:

Post hoc. Ergo, propter hoc.

After that. Therefore, because of that.

You may have heard this put a different way, as in the saying “correlation is not
causation.” This logical fallacy, often shortened to just “post hoc,” happens when we
believe one thing causes another, but in reality the two things only occur one after the
other. That is, X does not cause Y. X only occurs before Y.

31
The Second Level of Stasis: Cause and Consequence
 Consider this example. One day in September, Juan begins his day with a bowl of
cereal. Later that day, he takes a test and does very well. On another day the next
month, Juan again eats cereal and again does well on his test. In December, Juan
is running late for school and eats a muffin instead. That day he does very poorly
on his test. Based on these observations, Juan might conclude that the cereal is the
cause of his good grades. However, he hasn’t proven that. He only knows that the
two things seem to correlate (they often happen together).

There are several reasons why two things might correlate, and a cause and conse-
quence relationship is only one of those reasons. Perhaps, on the days when Juan ate
cereal, he also got plenty of sleep. The extra sleep allowed him time to make cereal,
and it also ensured he was well-rested and mentally sharp for his exam. Perhaps
both the cereal and the good grades are consequences, and the true cause is the ad-
ditional hours of sleep.

It is also possible that the correlation between the Juan’s cereal and his test was
simply due to chance. Juan based his assumption about cause and consequence on
only three observations. Perhaps if he repeated this observation ten times, he would
find there was no relationship at all. If there were no relationship between the two
things, we could say Juan is guilty of a “post hoc” error, but we might also say that
he has committed a “hasty generalization.” In a mistake of hasty generalization,
we base our argument on too few examples. We have been too “hasty” (so fast we
are not careful). We have leapt to a conclusion before examining enough evidence
to be sure. When building and evaluating cause and consequence arguments, a so-
phisticated rhetor is on the lookout for both of these fallacies in their own logic and
the logic of others.

Scientific Method and Experimental Design

One way to avoid these errors in logic is to employ the scientific method. Scientists
from astrophysicists to zoologists and social scientists from educators to psycholo-
gists employ scientific methods and experimental design in order to prove cause
and consequence arguments. Studying scientific method and experimental design is
important for many reasons. Many college students will use these ideas in their own
work in fields ranging from criminal justice to mechanical engineering. However,
every college student will need to investigate, evaluate, and support cause and effect
arguments.

You have probably already heard of the scientific method in other courses. The sci-
entific method focuses on using observable data as evidence to test hypotheses. In
the case of cause and consequence, the hypothesis is often that X does or does not
cause Y. Particularly in the case of science, it is important that we prove this relation-
ship with as much certainty as possible and that we do everything possible to ensure
we are not mistaking causation for correlation (committing a post hoc error).

32
Chapter 3
Three Criteria for Causation
When proving cause and consequence relationships, scientists and logicians both
focus on three primary criteria:

Time: also called “temporal precedence”

Correlation: sometimes called “covariance”

Elimination of Other Explanations: often through “controlling” for them

Proving the first two criteria (time and correlation) is often fairly simple, but prov-
ing the third can be extremely challenging. The first criterion, “time,” simply states
that the cause must occur before the consequence. X must happen before Y if X is
the cause of Y. The second criterion, correlation, is a bit more complex. Earlier we
used correlation to mean that when one thing happens, another also happens. For
instance, when Juan eats cereal, Juan also gets good test scores. We could phrase
this as “When X is present, Y is present.” To help prove two things correlate, the
opposite should also be true; “When X is gone, Y is gone.” or “When X is gone, Y is
more likely to be gone.”

In some cases, we are more interested in the amount or degree to which something
changes rather than its presence or absence. For instance, imagine Juan’s test is
scored 0 to 100 rather than pass/fail. Now we have a proportion instead of a yes or
no answer. We can also measure Juan’s sleep in number of hours. In this case, the
correlation would sound something like this: When Juan gets more sleep, his test
score goes up, but as Juan’s hours of sleep go down, his test score also goes down.

Proving the first two criteria (time and correlation) is often fairly straightforward
and can be done by simply observing a situation. In the case of Juan’s test, his
theory passed on the criterion of time. His cereal was eaten before the test. He based
his theory on only three observations, which might not be enough for a scientist to
give him a “pass” on the criterion of correlation. They would likely want hundreds
or thousands of observations and statistical analysis as well. With only three obser-
vations, these outcomes could simply be random chance. However, all three of his
observations supported the correlation. His scores were high when cereal was pres-
ent and low when cereal was absent.

However, proving the final criterion (eliminating other causes) is usually the hard-
est both for scientists and for rhetors. On the third criterion, Juan has a lot of work
to do in order to convince us of his claim. He must prove to us that it is the cereal
and not something else that is leading to the high scores. We already talked about
the possibility of sleep as one other alternate explanation. I’m sure you can think of
many other explanations. So how can we do this? How can we eliminate or disprove
these other possible causes?

33
The Second Level of Stasis: Cause and Consequence
 Experimental Design
Scientists often eliminate other possible causes through experimental design. Many
scientists agree that the best way to eliminate other causes is to create a “true experi-
ment” in which there are two groups (a test group and a control group). You may
have already seen or read about this type of experiment in a science lab or a social
science class like General Psychology. The test group has the cause we are interested
in, and the control group does not. The cause could be a characteristic of the group
like group members’ sex or height, or the test group could get a “treatment.” In the
cause of Juan and his test, the test group would get cereal (the treatment) while the
control group would get waffles or some other tasty breakfast treat. The goal is to
make the two groups as similar as possible in all the ways that matter (other than
the cause we are testing). In the case of Juan and his cereal, we could come up
with a list of things that might matter: sleep, intelligence, study hours, age, etc. The
more similar we make these two groups, the more certain we can be that the cereal
was the cause of the high test scores. Scientific experiments of this kind are often
described in articles and published in academic journals, and their results make ex-
cellent evidence for exploring or supporting an argument of cause and consequence.

Unfortunately, experimental designs are difficult to arrange in science and often

impossible to arrange for rhetors trying to support an argument. Even without using
an experiment, we can use logic and reason to try and eliminate other explanations.
One good way to do this is to explain the causal mechanism of the cause you are
supporting. If we can see a clear mechanism for one cause (like sleep), but we can-
not identify a mechanism for another (like cereal), we are more likely to believe the
cause that “makes sense” and has a clear mechanism.

Another useful tactic here is to consider as many possible explanations as you can
and then argue against each of them. If Juan wants to prove that the cereal is the
true case, he should try to come up with reasons why sleep cannot be the cause. For
instance, he could report to us that he got the same amount of sleep each time. Or,
he could show examples of when he got very little sleep and still did well on a test.

Handling Uncertainty
It would be wonderful to be 100% certain of every cause and consequence relation-
ship and to have infinite time and money set aside to prove the argument. However,
that is never the case. In many situations we must simply rely on logic and common
sense. An editorial in the scientific journal Nature Methods explains it this way:

One knows, without doing an experiment, that the street is wet on a rainy day
because the rain has fallen. To be sure, this form of causal reasoning requires
prior knowledge. One has seen the co-occurrence of rain and the wet street many
times and been taught that rain causes wetness. And although such relationships
are, in the strict sense, merely very good correlations, human beings routinely,
and necessarily, use them to assign cause and effect (“Cause”).

Every writer must decide for themselves how much evidence and investigation is
needed to understand or prove the cause and consequence argument by considering
their audience, their purpose, and the complexity of the topic.

34
Chapter 3
How to Begin Writing a Causal Argument
When writing a cause and consequence argument (or any kind or argument), it is
useful to begin by considering your audience and their needs and expectations. One
rarely needs to prove an argument that the audience already agrees with. We could
build an argument to prove that rain causes a street to be wet or that rich students
have an advantage in U.S. schools. But why? Why take the time to build an argument
if nearly everyone in our audience already believes this to be true?

Another important element when considering a cause and consequence argument is

how much we already know about the relationship. Imagine that every car more than
four years old suddenly stopped running. No one suspected this event. Therefore,
at the moment of it happening, we had no theories about the possible causes of the
event. Gradually, there would be competing causes and theories proposed, but, at
first, arguments would be simple—arguing only that a cause is possible, likely, or
perhaps even certain. The complexity of the argument is limited by our limited
knowledge of the topic, and simple arguments about possible causes are useful and
likely to be interesting to the audience.

Limited information can also influence arguments about unknown consequences.

Imagine that the president of a college campus wants to implement an immediate
ban on the sale of plastic pens on campus. The president likely has an intended con-
sequence (reducing plastic waste). However, no one has ever tried such a ban before;
we have no firsthand knowledge of the consequences anywhere, much less on that
specific campus. It is quite likely the ban will have unintended consequences,
consequences that were not part of our desired goal. To decide whether you support
the ban, you would have to make educated guesses about the possible consequences
or research similar bans in similar contexts.

In both these cases, the arguments are limited by how much is known about the
topic. People may have guesses, but in both cases, people probably have not had the
time or resources to study the questions carefully. When we know little about the
situation, simple arguments about cause and consequence are needed and useful
for an audience. However, as more information is gathered about a situation, more
complex arguments are often required.

As with most arguments, it is often better to find a cause and consequence argument
that people disagree about or one that we simply know very little about. We call
these types of claims arguable claims with which someone could and probably will
disagree before you prove it to be true. In Table 3-2, you can find situations where
you might find a truly arguable claim of cause and consequence. When choosing
a specific claim, consider both what is believed and what is known. When a lot is
known about a subject, your argument needs to be more complex to make the sub-
ject interesting. If most people already believe your claim is true, there is little point
in supporting it further.

35
The Second Level of Stasis: Cause and Consequence
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
du nez, allons, toi le plus beau des phoques, j’irai donc avec toi ce
soir au théâtre. Mais alors dînons! tu as un bon petit dîner, tous plats
de ton goût.
—Il est bien difficile, dit Castanier, de quitter une femme comme
toi!
—Hé! bien donc, pourquoi t’en vas-tu? lui demanda-t-elle.
—Ah! pourquoi! pourquoi! il faudrait pour te l’expliquer te dire des
choses qui te prouveraient que mon amour pour toi va jusqu’à la
folie. Si tu m’as donné ton honneur, j’ai vendu le mien, nous sommes
quittes. Est-ce aimer?
—Qu’est-ce que c’est que ça? dit-elle. Allons, dis-moi que si
j’avais un amant, tu m’aimerais toujours comme un père, ce sera de
l’amour! Allons, dites-le tout de suite, et donnez la patte.
—Je te tuerais, dis Castanier en souriant.
Ils allèrent se mettre à table, et partirent pour le Gymnase après
avoir dîné. Quand la première pièce fut jouée, Castanier voulut aller
se montrer à quelques personnes de sa connaissance qu’il avait
vues dans la salle, afin de détourner le plus long-temps possible tout
soupçon sur sa fuite. Il laissa madame de La Garde dans sa loge,
qui, suivant ses habitudes modestes, était une baignoire, et il vint se
promener dans le foyer. A peine y eut-il fait quelques pas, qu’il
rencontra la figure de Melmoth dont le regard lui causa la fade
chaleur d’entrailles, la terreur qu’il avait déjà ressenties, et ils
arrivèrent en face l’un de l’autre.
—Faussaire! cria l’Anglais.
En entendant ce mot, Castanier regarda les gens qui se
promenaient. Il crut apercevoir un étonnement mêlé de curiosité sur
leurs figures, il voulut se défaire de cet Anglais à l’instant même, et
leva la main pour lui donner un soufflet; mais il se sentit le bras
paralysé par une puissance invincible qui s’empara de sa force et le
cloua sur la place; il laissa l’étranger lui prendre le bras, et tous deux
ils marchèrent ensemble dans le foyer, comme deux amis.
 —Qui donc est assez fort pour me résister? lui dit l’Anglais. Ne
sais-tu pas que tout ici-bas doit m’obéir, que je puis tout? Je lis dans
les cœurs, je vois l’avenir, je sais le passé. Je suis ici, et je puis être
ailleurs! Je ne dépends ni du temps, ni de l’espace, ni de la distance.
Le monde est mon serviteur. J’ai la faculté de toujours jouir, et de
donner toujours le bonheur. Mon œil perce les murailles, voit les
trésors, et j’y puise à pleines mains. A un signe de ma tête, des
palais se bâtissent et mon architecte ne se trompe jamais. Je puis
faire éclore des fleurs sur tous les terrains, entasser des pierreries,
amonceler l’or, me procurer des femmes toujours nouvelles; enfin,
tout me cède. Je pourrais jouer à la Bourse à coup sûr, si l’homme
qui sait trouver l’or là où les avares l’enterrent avait besoin de puiser
dans la bourse des autres. Sens donc, pauvre misérable voué à la
honte, sens donc la puissance de la serre qui te tient. Essaie de faire
plier ce bras de fer! amollis ce cœur de diamant! ose t’éloigner de
moi! Quand tu serais au fond des caves qui sont sous la Seine,
n’entendrais-tu pas ma voix? Quand tu irais dans les catacombes,
ne me verrais-tu pas? Ma voix domine le bruit de la foudre, mes
yeux luttent de clarté avec le soleil, car je suis l’égal de Celui qui
porte la lumière. Castanier entendait ces terribles paroles, rien en lui
ne les contredisait, et il marchait à côté de l’Anglais sans qu’il pût
s’en éloigner.—Tu m’appartiens, tu viens de commettre un crime.
J’ai donc enfin trouvé le compagnon que je cherchais. Veux-tu savoir
ta destinée? Ha! ha! tu comptais voir un spectacle, il ne te manquera
pas, tu en auras deux. Allons, présente-moi à madame de La Garde
comme un de tes meilleurs amis. Ne suis-je pas ta dernière
espérance.
Castanier revint à sa loge suivi de l’étranger, qu’il s’empressa de
présenter à madame de La Garde, suivant l’ordre qu’il venait de
recevoir. Aquilina ne parut point surprise de voir Melmoth. L’Anglais
refusa de se mettre sur le devant de la loge, et voulut que Castanier
y restât avec sa maîtresse. Le plus simple désir de l’Anglais était un
ordre auquel il fallait obéir. La pièce qu’on allait jouer était la
dernière. Alors les petits théâtres ne donnaient que trois pièces. Le
Gymnase avait à cette époque un acteur qui lui assurait la vogue.
Perlet allait jouer le Comédien d’Étampes, vaudeville où il remplissait
quatre rôles différents. Quand la toile se leva, l’étranger étendit la
main sur la salle. Castanier poussa un cri de terreur qui s’arrêta
dans son gosier dont les parois se collèrent, car Melmoth lui montra
du doigt la scène, en lui faisant comprendre ainsi qu’il avait ordonné
de changer le spectacle. Le caissier vit le cabinet de Nucingen, son
patron y était en conférence avec un employé supérieur de la
préfecture de police qui lui expliquait la conduite de Castanier, en le
prévenant de la soustraction faite à sa caisse, du faux commis à son
préjudice et de la fuite de son caissier. Une plainte était aussitôt
dressée, signée, et transmise au procureur du roi,—«Croyez-vous
qu’il sera temps encore? disait Nucingen.—Oui, répondit l’agent, il
est au Gymnase et ne se doute de rien.»
Castanier s’agita sur sa chaise, et voulut s’en aller; mais la main
que Melmoth lui appuyait sur l’épaule le forçait à rester, par un effet
de l’horrible puissance dont nous sentons les effets dans le
cauchemar. Cet homme était le cauchemar même, et posait sur
Castanier comme une atmosphère empoisonnée. Quand le pauvre
caissier se retournait pour implorer cet Anglais, il rencontrait un
regard de feu qui vomissait des courants électriques, espèce de
pointes métalliques par lesquelles Castanier se sentait pénétré,
traversé de part en part et cloué.
—Que t’ai-je fait? disait-il dans son abattement et en haletant
comme un cerf au bord d’une fontaine, que veux-tu de moi?
—Regarde! lui cria Melmoth.
Castanier regarda ce qui se passait sur la scène. La décoration
avait été changée, le spectacle était fini, Castanier se vit lui-même
sur la scène descendant de voiture avec Aquilina; mais au moment
où il entrait dans la cour de sa maison, rue Richer, la décoration
changea subitement encore, et représenta l’intérieur de son
appartement. Jenny causait au coin du feu, dans la chambre de sa
maîtresse, avec un sous-officier d’un régiment de ligne, en garnison
à Paris.—«Il part, disait ce sergent, qui paraissait appartenir à une
famille de gens aisés. Je vais donc être heureux à mon aise. J’aime
trop Aquilina pour souffrir qu’elle appartienne à ce vieux crapaud!
Moi, j’épouserai madame de La Garde! s’écriait le sergent.»
—Vieux crapaud! se dit douloureusement Castanier.
 —«Voilà madame et monsieur, cachez-vous! Tenez, mettez-vous
là, monsieur Léon, lui disait Jenny. Monsieur ne doit pas rester long-
temps.» Castanier voyait le sous-officier se mettant derrière les
robes d’Aquilina dans le cabinet de toilette. Castanier rentra bientôt
lui-même en scène, et fit ses adieux à sa maîtresse qui se moquait
de lui dans ses a parte avec Jenny, tout en lui disant les paroles les
plus douces et les plus caressantes. Elle pleurait d’un côté, riait de
l’autre. Les spectateurs faisaient répéter les couplets.
—Maudite femme! criait Castanier dans sa loge.
Aquilina riait aux larmes en s’écriant:—Mon Dieu! Perlet est-il
drôle en Anglais! Quoi! vous seuls dans la salle ne riez pas? Ris
donc, mon chat! dit-elle au caissier.
Melmoth se mit à rire d’une façon qui fit frissonner le caissier. Ce
rire anglais lui tordait les entrailles et lui travaillait la cervelle comme
si quelque chirurgien le trépanait avec un fer brûlant.
—Ils rient, ils rient, disait convulsivement Castanier.
En ce moment, au lieu de voir la pudibonde lady que représentait
si comiquement Perlet, et dont le parler anglo-français faisait pouffer
de rire toute la salle, le caissier se voyait fuyant la rue Richer,
montant dans un fiacre sur le boulevard, faisant son marché pour
aller à Versailles. La scène changeait encore. Il reconnut, au coin de
la rue de l’Orangerie et de la rue des Récollets, la petite auberge
borgne que tenait son ancien maréchal-des-logis. Il était deux
heures du matin, le plus grand silence régnait, personne ne l’épiait,
sa voiture était attelée de chevaux de poste, et venait d’une maison
de l’avenue de Paris où demeurait un Anglais pour qui elle avait été
demandée, afin de détourner les soupçons. Castanier avait ses
valeurs et ses passe-ports, il montait en voiture, il partait. Mais à la
barrière, Castanier aperçut des gendarmes à pied qui attendaient la
voiture. Il jeta un cri affreux que comprima le regard de Melmoth.
—Regarde toujours, et tais-toi! lui dit l’Anglais.
Castanier se vit en un moment jeté en prison à la Conciergerie.
Puis, au cinquième acte de ce drame intitulé le Caissier, il s’aperçut,
à trois mois de là, sortant de la Cour d’Assises, condamné à vingt
ans de travaux forcés. Il jeta un nouveau cri quand il se vit exposé
sur la place du Palais-de-Justice, et que le fer rouge du bourreau le
marqua. Enfin, à la dernière scène, il était dans la cour de Bicêtre,
parmi soixante forçats, et attendait son tour pour aller faire river ses
fers.
—Mon Dieu! je n’en puis plus de rire, disait Aquilina. Vous êtes
bien sombre, mon chat, qu’avez-vous donc? ce monsieur n’est plus
là.
—Deux mots, Castanier, lui dit Melmoth au moment où la pièce
finie madame de La Garde se faisait mettre son manteau par
l’ouvreuse.
Le corridor était encombré, toute fuite était impossible.
—Eh! bien, quoi?
—Aucune puissance humaine ne peut t’empêcher d’aller
reconduire Aquilina, d’aller à Versailles, et d’y être arrêté.
—Pourquoi?
—Parce que le bras qui te tient, dit l’Anglais, ne te lâchera point.
Castanier aurait voulu pouvoir prononcer quelques paroles pour
s’anéantir lui-même et disparaître au fond des enfers.
—Si le démon te demandait ton âme, ne la donnerais-tu pas en
échange d’une puissance égale à celle de Dieu? D’un seul mot, tu
restituerais dans la caisse du baron de Nucingen les cinq cent mille
francs que tu y as pris. Puis, en déchirant ta lettre de crédit, toute
trace de crime serait anéantie. Enfin, tu aurais de l’or à flots. Tu ne
crois guère à rien, n’est-ce pas? Hé bien! si tout cela arrive, tu
croiras au moins au diable.
—Si c’était possible! dit Castanier avec joie.
—Celui qui peut faire ceci, répondit l’Anglais, te l’affirme.
Melmoth étendit le bras au moment où Castanier, madame de La
Garde et lui se trouvaient sur le boulevard. Il tombait alors une pluie
fine, le sol était boueux, l’atmosphère était épaisse, et le ciel était
noir. Aussitôt que le bras de cet homme fut étendu, le soleil illumina
Paris. Castanier se vit, en plein midi, comme par un beau jour de
juillet. Les arbres étaient couverts de feuilles, et les Parisiens
endimanchés circulaient en deux files joyeuses. Les marchands de
coco criaient:—A boire, à la fraîche! Des équipages brillaient en
roulant sur la chaussée. Le caissier jeta un cri de terreur. A ce cri, le
boulevard redevint humide et sombre. Madame de La Garde était
montée en voiture.
—Mais dépêche-toi donc, mon ami, lui dit-elle, viens ou reste.
Vraiment, ce soir, tu es ennuyeux comme la pluie qui tombe.
—Que faut-il faire? dit Castanier à Melmoth.
—Veux-tu prendre ma place? lui demanda l’Anglais.
—Oui.
—Eh! bien, je serai chez toi dans quelques instants.
—Ah! ça, Castanier, tu n’es pas dans ton assiette ordinaire, lui
disait Aquilina. Tu médites quelque mauvais coup, tu étais trop
sombre et trop pensif pendant le spectacle. Mon cher ami, te faut-il
quelque chose que je puisse te donner? Parle.
—J’attends, pour savoir si tu m’aimes, que nous soyons arrivés à
la maison.
—Ce n’est pas la peine d’attendre, dit-elle en se jetant à son cou,
tiens!
Elle l’embrassa fort passionnément en apparence en lui faisant
de ces cajoleries qui, chez ces sortes de créatures, deviennent des
choses de métier, comme le sont les jeux de scène pour des
actrices.
—D’où vient cette musique? dit Castanier.
—Allons, voilà que tu entends de la musique, maintenant.
—De la musique céleste! reprit-il. On dirait que les sons viennent
d’en haut.
—Comment, toi qui m’as toujours refusé une baignoire aux
Italiens, sous prétexte que tu ne pouvais pas souffrir la musique, te
voilà mélomane, à cette heure! Mais tu es fou! ta musique est dans
ta caboche, vieille boule détraquée! dit-elle en lui prenant la tête et la
faisant rouler sur son épaule. Dis donc, papa, sont-ce les roues de la
voiture qui chantent?
—Écoute donc, Naqui? si les anges font de la musique au bon
Dieu, ce ne peut être que celle dont les accords m’entrent par tous
les pores autant que par les oreilles, et je ne sais comment t’en
parler, c’est suave comme de l’eau de miel!
—Mais certainement on lui fait de la musique au bon Dieu, car on
représente toujours les anges avec des harpes. Ma parole
d’honneur, il est fou, se dit-elle en voyant Castanier dans l’attitude
d’un mangeur d’opium en extase.
Ils étaient arrivés. Castanier, absorbé par tout ce qu’il venait de
voir et d’entendre, ne sachant s’il devait croire ou douter, allait
comme un homme ivre, privé de raison. Il se réveilla dans la
chambre d’Aquilina où il avait été porté, soutenu par sa maîtresse,
par le portier et par Jenny, car il s’était évanoui en sortant de sa
voiture.
—Mes amis, mes amis, il va venir, dit-il en se plongeant par un
mouvement désespéré dans sa bergère au coin du feu.
En ce moment Jenny entendit la sonnette, alla ouvrir, et annonça
l’Anglais en disant que c’était un monsieur qui avait rendez-vous
avec Castanier. Melmoth se montra soudain. Il se fit un grand
silence. Il regarda le portier, le portier s’en alla. Il regarda Jenny,
Jenny s’en alla.
—Madame, dit Melmoth à la courtisane, permettez-nous de
terminer une affaire qui ne souffre aucun retard.
Il prit Castanier par la main, et Castanier se leva. Tous deux
allèrent dans le salon sans lumière, car l’œil de Melmoth éclairait les
ténèbres les plus épaisses. Fascinée par le regard étrange de
l’inconnu, Aquilina demeura sans force, et incapable de songer à
son amant, qu’elle croyait d’ailleurs enfermé chez sa femme de
chambre, tandis que, surprise par le prompt retour de Castanier,
Jenny l’avait caché dans le cabinet de toilette, comme dans la scène
du drame joué pour Melmoth et pour sa victime. La porte de
l’appartement se ferma violemment, et bientôt Castanier reparut.
—Qu’as-tu? lui cria sa maîtresse frappée d’horreur.
La physionomie du caissier était changée. Son teint rouge avait
fait place à la pâleur étrange qui rendait l’étranger sinistre et froid.
Ses yeux jetaient un feu sombre qui blessait par un éclat
insupportable. Son attitude de bonhomie était devenue despotique et
fière. La courtisane trouva Castanier maigri, le front lui sembla
majestueusement horrible, et le dragon exhalait une influence
épouvantable qui pesait sur les autres comme une lourde
atmosphère. Aquilina se sentit pendant un moment gênée.
—Que s’est-il passé en si peu de temps entre cet homme
diabolique et toi? demanda-t-elle.
—Je lui ai vendu mon âme. Je le sens, je ne suis plus le même. Il
m’a pris mon être, et m’a donné le sien.
—Comment?
—Tu n’y comprendrais rien. Ha! dit Castanier froidement, il avait
raison, ce démon! Je vois tout et sais tout. Tu me trompais.
Ces mots glacèrent Aquilina. Castanier alla dans le cabinet de
toilette après avoir allumé un bougeoir, la pauvre fille stupéfaite l’y
suivit, et son étonnement fut grand lorsque Castanier, ayant écarté
les robes accrochées au porte-manteau, découvrit le sous-officier.
—Venez, mon cher, lui dit-il en prenant Léon par le bouton de la
redingote et l’amenant dans la chambre.
La Piémontaise, pâle, éperdue, était allée se jeter dans son
fauteuil. Castanier s’assit sur la causeuse au coin du feu, et laissa
l’amant d’Aquilina debout.
—Vous êtes ancien militaire, lui dit Léon, je suis prêt à vous
rendre raison.
—Vous êtes un niais, répondit sèchement Castanier. Je n’ai plus
besoin de me battre, je puis tuer qui je veux d’un regard. Je vais
vous dire votre fait, mon petit. Pourquoi vous tuerais-je? Vous avez
sur le cou une ligne rouge que je vois. La guillotine vous attend. Oui,
vous mourrez en place de Grève. Vous appartenez au bourreau, rien
ne peut vous sauver. Vous faites partie d’une Vente de
Charbonniers. Vous conspirez contre le gouvernement.
—Tu ne me l’avais pas dit! cria la Piémontaise à Léon.
—Vous ne savez donc pas, dit le caissier en continuant toujours,
que le ministère a décidé ce matin de poursuivre votre association?
Le procureur-général a pris vos noms. Vous êtes dénoncés par des
traîtres. On travaille en ce moment à préparer les éléments de votre
acte d’accusation.
—C’est donc toi qui l’as trahi?... dit Aquilina qui poussa un
rugissement de lionne et se leva pour venir déchirer Castanier.
—Tu me connais trop pour le croire, répondit Castanier avec un
sang-froid qui pétrifia sa maîtresse.
—Comment le sais-tu donc?
—Je l’ignorais avant d’aller dans le salon; mais, maintenant, je
vois tout, je sais tout, je peux tout.
Le sous-officier était stupéfait.
—Hé! bien, sauve-le, mon ami, s’écria la fille en se jetant aux
genoux de Castanier. Sauvez-le, puisque vous pouvez tout! Je vous
aimerai, je vous adorerai, je serai votre esclave au lieu d’être votre
maîtresse. Je me vouerai à vos caprices les plus désordonnés, tu
feras de moi tout ce que tu voudras. Oui, je trouverai plus que de
l’amour pour vous; j’aurai le dévouement d’une fille pour son père,
joint à celui d’une... mais... comprends donc, Rodolphe! Enfin,
quelque violentes que soient mes passions, je serai toujours à toi!
Qu’est-ce que je pourrais dire pour te toucher? J’inventerai les
plaisirs... Je... Mon Dieu! tiens, quand tu voudras quelque chose de
moi, comme de me faire jeter par la fenêtre, tu n’auras qu’à me dire:
—Léon! je me précipiterais alors dans l’enfer, j’accepterais tous les
tourments, toutes les maladies, tous les chagrins, tout ce que tu
m’imposerais!
 Castanier resta froid. Pour toute réponse, il montra Léon en
disant avec un rire de démon:—La guillotine l’attend.
—Non, il ne sortira pas d’ici, je le sauverai, s’écria-t-elle. Oui, je
tuerai qui le touchera! Pourquoi ne veux-tu pas le sauver? criait-elle
d’une voix étincelante, l’œil en feu, les cheveux épars. Le peux-tu?
—Je puis tout.
—Pourquoi ne le sauves-tu pas?
—Pourquoi? cria Castanier dont la voix vibra jusque dans les
planchers. Hé! je me venge! C’est mon métier de mal faire.
—Mourir, reprit Aquilina, lui, mon amant, est-ce possible?
Elle bondit jusqu’à sa commode, y saisit un stylet qui était dans
une corbeille, et vint à Castanier qui se mit à rire.
—Tu sais bien que le fer ne peut plus m’atteindre.
Le bras d’Aquilina se détendit comme une corde de harpe
subitement coupée.
—Sortez, mon cher ami, dit le caissier en se retournant vers le
sous-officier; allez à vos affaires.
Il étendit la main, et le militaire fut obligé d’obéir à la force
supérieure que déployait Castanier.
—Je suis ici chez moi, je pourrais envoyer chercher le
commissaire de police et lui livrer un homme qui s’introduit dans
mon domicile, je préfère vous rendre la liberté: je suis un démon, je
ne suis pas un espion.
—Je le suivrai, dit Aquilina.
—Suis-le, dit Castanier. Jenny?...
Jenny parut.
—Envoyez le portier leur chercher un fiacre.
—Tiens, Naqui, dit Castanier en tirant de sa poche un paquet de
billets de banque, tu ne quitteras pas, comme une misérable, un
homme qui t’aime encore.
 Il lui tendit trois cent mille francs, Aquilina les prit, les jeta par
terre, cracha dessus en les piétinant avec la rage du désespoir, en
lui disant:—Nous sortirons tous deux à pied, sans un sou de toi.
Reste, Jenny.
—Bonsoir! reprit le caissier en ramassant son argent. Moi, je suis
revenu de voyage.—Jenny, dit-il en regardant la femme de chambre
ébahie, tu me parais bonne fille. Te voilà sans maîtresse, viens ici?
pour ce soir, tu auras un maître.
Aquilina, se défiant de tout, s’en alla promptement avec le sous-
officier chez une de ses amies. Mais Léon était l’objet des soupçons
de la police, qui le faisait suivre partout où il allait. Aussi fut-il arrêté
quelque temps après, avec ses trois amis, comme le dirent les
journaux du temps.
Le caissier se sentit changé complétement au moral comme au
physique. Le Castanier, tour à tour enfant, jeune, amoureux,
militaire, courageux, trompé, marié, désillusionné, caissier,
passionné, criminel par amour, n’existait plus. Sa forme intérieure
avait éclaté. En un moment, son crâne s’était élargi, ses sens
avaient grandi. Sa pensée embrassa le monde, il en vit les choses
comme s’il eût été placé à une hauteur prodigieuse. Avant d’aller au
spectacle, il éprouvait pour Aquilina la passion la plus insensée,
plutôt que de renoncer à elle il aurait fermé les yeux sur ses
infidélités, ce sentiment aveugle s’était dissipé comme une nuée se
fond sous les rayons du soleil. Heureuse de succéder à sa
maîtresse, et d’en posséder la fortune, Jenny fit tout ce que voulait le
caissier. Mais Castanier, qui avait le pouvoir de lire dans les âmes,
découvrit le motif véritable de ce dévouement purement physique.
Aussi s’amusa-t-il de cette fille avec la malicieuse avidité d’un enfant
qui, après avoir exprimé le jus d’une cerise, en lance le noyau. Le
lendemain, au moment où, pendant le déjeuner, elle se croyait dame
et maîtresse au logis, Castanier lui répéta mot à mot, pensée à
pensée, ce qu’elle se disait à elle-même, en buvant son café.
—Sais-tu ce que tu penses, ma petite? lui dit-il en souriant, le
voici: «Ces beaux meubles en bois de palissandre que je désirais
tant, et ces belles robes que j’essayais, sont donc à moi! Il ne m’en a
coûté que des bêtises que madame lui refusait, je ne sais pas
pourquoi. Ma foi, pour aller en carrosse, avoir des parures, être au
spectacle dans une loge, et me faire des rentes, je lui donnerais bien
des plaisirs à l’en faire crever, s’il n’était pas fort comme un Turc. Je
n’ai jamais vu d’homme pareil!»—Est-ce bien cela? reprit-il d’une
voix qui fit pâlir Jenny. Eh! bien, oui, ma fille, tu n’y tiendrais pas, et
c’est pour ton bien que je te renvoie, tu périrais à la peine. Allons,
quittons-nous bons amis.
Et il la congédia froidement en lui donnant une fort légère
somme.
Le premier usage que Castanier s’était promis de faire du terrible
pouvoir qu’il venait d’acheter, au prix de son éternité bienheureuse,
était la satisfaction pleine et entière de ses goûts. Après avoir mis
ordre à ses affaires, et rendu facilement ses comptes à monsieur de
Nucingen qui lui donna pour successeur un bon Allemand, il voulut
une bacchanale digne des beaux jours de l’empire romain, et s’y
plongea désespérément comme Balthazar à son dernier festin. Mais,
comme Balthazar, il vit distinctivement une main pleine de lumière
qui lui traça son arrêt au milieu de ses joies, non pas sur les murs
étroits d’une salle, mais sur les parois immenses où se dessine l’arc-
en-ciel. Son festin ne fut pas en effet une orgie circonscrite aux
bornes d’un banquet, ce fut une dissipation de toutes les forces et de
toutes les jouissances. La table était en quelque sorte la terre même
qu’il sentait trembler sous ses pieds. Ce fut la dernière fête d’un
dissipateur qui ne ménage plus rien. En puisant à pleines mains
dans le trésor des voluptés humaines dont la clef lui avait été remise
par le Démon, il en atteignit promptement le fond. Cette énorme
puissance, en un instant appréhendée, fut en un instant exercée,
jugée, usée. Ce qui était tout, ne fut rien. Il arrive souvent que la
possession tue les plus immenses poèmes du désir, aux rêves
duquel l’objet possédé répond rarement. Ce triste dénoûment de
quelques passions était celui que cachait l’omnipotence de Melmoth.
L’inanité de la nature humaine fut soudain révélée à son successeur,
auquel la suprême puissance apporta le néant pour dot. Afin de bien
comprendre la situation bizarre dans laquelle se trouva Castanier, il
faudrait pouvoir en apprécier par la pensée les rapides révolutions,
et concevoir combien elles eurent peu de durée, ce dont il est
difficile de donner une idée à ceux qui restent emprisonnés par les
lois du temps, de l’espace et des distances. Ses facultés agrandies
avaient changé les rapports qui existaient auparavant entre le
monde et lui. Comme Melmoth, Castanier pouvait en quelques
instants être dans les riantes vallées de l’Hindoustan, passer sur les
ailes des démons à travers les déserts de l’Afrique, et glisser sur les
mers. De même que sa lucidité lui faisait tout pénétrer à l’instant où
sa vue se portait sur un objet matériel ou dans la pensée d’autrui, de
même sa langue happait pour ainsi dire toutes les saveurs d’un
coup. Son plaisir ressemblait au coup de hache du despotisme, qui
abat l’arbre pour en avoir les fruits. Les transitions, les alternatives
qui mesurent la joie, la souffrance, et varient toutes les jouissances
humaines, n’existaient plus pour lui. Son palais, devenu sensitif
outre mesure, s’était blasé tout à coup en se rassasiant de tout. Les
femmes et la bonne chère furent deux plaisirs si complétement
assouvis, du moment où il put les goûter de manière à se trouver au
delà du plaisir, qu’il n’eut plus envie ni de manger, ni d’aimer. Se
sachant maître de toutes les femmes qu’il souhaiterait, et se sachant
armé d’une force qui ne devait jamais faillir, il ne voulait plus de
femmes; en les trouvant par avance soumises à ses caprices les
plus désordonnés, il se sentait une horrible soif d’amour, et les
désirait plus aimantes qu’elles ne pouvaient l’être. Mais la seule
chose que lui refusait le monde, c’était la foi, la prière, ces deux
onctueuses et consolantes amours. On lui obéissait. Ce fut un
horrible état. Les torrents de douleurs, de plaisirs et de pensées qui
secouaient son corps et son âme eussent emporté la créature
humaine la plus forte; mais il y avait en lui une puissance de vie
proportionnée à la vigueur des sensations qui l’assaillaient. Il sentit
en dedans de lui quelque chose d’immense que la terre ne
satisfaisait plus. Il passait la journée à étendre ses ailes, à vouloir
traverser les sphères lumineuses dont il avait une intuition nette et
désespérante. Il se dessécha intérieurement, car il eut soif et faim de
choses qui ne se buvaient ni ne se mangeaient, mais qui l’attiraient
irrésistiblement. Ses lèvres devinrent ardentes de désir, comme
l’étaient celles de Melmoth, et il haletait après l’INCONNU, car il
connaissait tout. En voyant le principe et le mécanisme du monde, il
n’en admirait plus les résultats, et manifesta bientôt ce dédain
profond qui rend l’homme supérieur semblable à un sphinx qui sait
tout, voit tout, et garde une silencieuse immobilité. Il ne se sentait
pas la moindre velléité de communiquer sa science aux autres
hommes. Riche de toute la terre, et pouvant la franchir d’un bond, la
richesse et le pouvoir ne signifièrent plus rien pour lui. Il éprouvait
cette horrible mélancolie de la suprême puissance à laquelle Satan
et Dieu ne remédient que par une activité dont le secret n’appartient
qu’à eux. Castanier n’avait pas, comme son maître, l’inextinguible
puissance de haïr et de mal faire; il se sentait démon, mais démon à
venir, tandis que Satan est démon pour l’éternité; rien ne le peut
racheter, il le sait, et alors il se plaît à remuer avec sa triple fourche
les mondes comme un fumier, en y tracassant les desseins de Dieu.
Pour son malheur, Castanier conservait une espérance. Ainsi tout à
coup, en un moment, il put aller d’un pôle à l’autre, comme un
oiseau vole désespérément entre les deux côtés de sa cage; mais,
après avoir fait ce bond, comme l’oiseau, il vit des espaces
immenses. Il eut de l’infini une vision qui ne lui permit plus de
considérer les choses humaines comme les autres hommes les
considèrent. Les insensés qui souhaitent la puissance des démons,
la jugent avec leurs idées d’hommes, sans prévoir qu’ils endosseront
les idées du démon en prenant son pouvoir, qu’ils resteront hommes
et au milieu d’êtres qui ne peuvent plus les comprendre. Le Néron
inédit qui rêve de faire brûler Paris pour sa distraction, comme on
donne au théâtre le spectacle fictif d’un incendie, ne se doute pas
que Paris deviendra pour lui ce qu’est pour un voyageur pressé la
fourmilière qui borde un chemin. Les sciences furent pour Castanier
ce qu’est un logogriphe pour celui qui en sait le mot. Les rois, les
gouvernements lui faisaient pitié. Sa grande débauche fut donc, en
quelque sorte un déplorable adieu à sa condition d’homme. Il se
sentit à l’étroit sur la terre, car son infernale puissance le faisait
assister au spectacle de la création dont il entrevoyait les causes et
la fin. En se voyant exclus de ce que les hommes ont nommé le ciel
dans tous leurs langages, il ne pouvait plus penser qu’au ciel. Il
comprit alors le dessèchement intérieur exprimé sur la face de son
prédécesseur, il mesura l’étendue de ce regard allumé par un espoir
toujours trahi, il éprouva la soif qui brûlait cette lèvre rouge, et les
angoisses d’un combat perpétuel entre deux natures agrandies. Il
pouvait être encore un ange, il se trouvait un démon. Il ressemblait à
la suave créature emprisonnée par le mauvais vouloir d’un
enchanteur dans un corps difforme, et qui, prise sous la cloche d’un
pacte, avait besoin de la volonté d’autrui pour briser une détestable
enveloppe détestée. De même que l’homme vraiment grand n’en a
que plus d’ardeur à chercher l’infini du sentiment dans un cœur de
femme, après une déception; de même Castanier se trouva tout à
coup sous le poids d’une seule idée, idée qui peut-être était la clef
des mondes supérieurs. Par cela seul qu’il avait renoncé à son
éternité bienheureuse, il ne pensait plus qu’à l’avenir de ceux qui
prient et qui croient. Quand, au sortir de la débauche où il prit
possession de son pouvoir, il sentit l’étreinte de ce sentiment, il
connut les douleurs que les poètes sacrés, les apôtres et les grands
oracles de la foi nous ont dépeintes en des termes si gigantesques.
Harponné par l’épée flamboyante de laquelle il sentait la pointe dans
ses reins, il courut chez Melmoth, afin de voir ce qu’il advenait de
son prédécesseur. L’Anglais demeurait rue Férou, près Saint-
Sulpice, dans un hôtel sombre, noir, humide et froid. Cette rue,
ouverte au nord, comme toutes celles qui tombent
perpendiculairement sur la rive gauche de la Seine, est une des rues
les plus tristes de Paris, et son caractère réagit sur les maisons qui
la bordent. Quand Castanier fut sur le seuil de la porte, il la vit
tendue de noir, la voûte était également drapée. Sous cette voûte,
éclataient les lumières d’une chapelle ardente. On y avait élevé un
cénotaphe temporaire, de chaque côté duquel se tenait un prêtre.
—Il ne faut pas demander à monsieur pourquoi il vient, dit à
Castanier une vieille portière, vous ressemblez trop à ce pauvre cher
défunt. Si donc vous êtes son frère, vous arrivez trop tard pour lui
dire adieu. Ce brave gentilhomme est mort avant-hier dans la nuit.
—Comment est-il mort? demanda Castanier à l’un des prêtres.
—Soyez heureux, lui répondit un vieux prêtre en soulevant un
côté des draps noirs qui formaient la chapelle.
Castanier vit une de ces figures que la foi rend sublimes et par
les pores de laquelle l’âme semble sortir pour rayonner sur les
autres hommes et les échauffer par les sentiments d’une charité
persistante. Cet homme était le confesseur de sir John Melmoth.
—Monsieur votre frère, dit le prêtre en continuant, a fait une fin
digne d’envie, et qui a dû réjouir les anges. Vous savez quelle joie
répand dans les cieux la conversion d’une âme pécheresse. Les
pleurs de son repentir excités par la grâce ont coulé sans tarir, la
mort seule a pu les arrêter. L’Esprit saint était en lui. Ses paroles
ardentes et vives ont été dignes du Roi prophète. Si jamais, dans le
cours de ma vie, je n’ai entendu de confession plus horrible que
celle de ce gentilhomme irlandais, jamais aussi n’ai-je entendu de
prières plus enflammées. Quelque grandes qu’aient été ses fautes,
son repentir en a comblé l’abîme en un moment. La main de Dieu
s’est visiblement étendue sur lui, car il ne ressemblait plus à lui-
même, tant il est devenu saintement beau. Ses yeux si rigides se
sont adoucis dans les pleurs. Sa voix si vibrante, et qui effrayait, a
pris la grâce et la mollesse qui distinguent les paroles des gens
humiliés. Il édifiait tellement les auditeurs par ses discours, que les
personnes attirées par le spectacle de cette mort chrétienne, se
mettaient à genoux en écoutant glorifier Dieu, parler de ses
grandeurs infinies, et raconter les choses du ciel. S’il ne laisse rien à
sa famille, il lui a certes acquis le plus grand bien que les familles
puissent posséder, une âme sainte qui veillera sur vous tous, et vous
conduira dans la bonne voie.
Ces paroles produisirent un effet si violent sur Castanier qu’il
sortit brusquement et marcha vers l’église de Saint-Sulpice en
obéissant à une sorte de fatalité, le repentir de Melmoth l’avait
abasourdi. Vers cette époque, un homme célèbre par son éloquence
faisait, le matin, à certains jours, des conférences qui avaient pour
but de démontrer les vérités de la religion catholique à la jeunesse
de ce siècle proclamée par une autre voix non moins éloquente,
indifférente en matière de foi. La conférence devait faire place à
l’enterrement de l’Irlandais. Castanier arriva précisément au moment
où le prédicateur allait résumer avec cette onction gracieuse, avec
cette pénétrante parole qui l’ont illustré, les preuves de notre
heureux avenir. L’ancien dragon, sous la peau duquel s’était glissé le
démon, se trouvait dans les conditions voulues pour recevoir
fructueusement la semence des paroles divines commentées par le
prêtre. En effet, s’il est un phénomène constaté, n’est-ce pas le
phénomène moral que le peuple a nommé la foi du charbonnier? La
force de la croyance se trouve en raison directe du plus ou moins
d’usage que l’homme a fait de sa raison. Les gens simples et les
soldats sont de ce nombre. Ceux qui ont marché dans la vie sous la
bannière de l’instinct, sont beaucoup plus propres à recevoir la
lumière que ceux dont l’esprit et le cœur se sont lassés dans les
subtilités du monde. Depuis l’âge de seize ans, jusqu’à près de
quarante ans, Castanier, homme du midi, avait suivi le drapeau
français. Simple cavalier, obligé de se battre le jour, la veille et le
lendemain, il devait penser à son cheval avant de songer à lui-
même. Pendant son apprentissage militaire, il avait donc eu peu
d’heures pour réfléchir à l’avenir de l’homme. Officier, il s’était
occupé de ses soldats, et il avait été entraîné de champ de bataille
en champ de bataille, sans avoir jamais songé au lendemain de la
mort. La vie militaire exige peu d’idées. Les gens incapables de
s’élever à ces hautes combinaisons qui embrassent les intérêts de
nation à nation, les plans de la politique aussi bien que les plans de
campagne, la science du tacticien et celle de l’administrateur, ceux-
là vivent dans un état d’ignorance comparable à celle du paysan le
plus grossier de la province la moins avancée de France. Ils vont en
avant, obéissent passivement à l’âme qui les commande, et tuent les
hommes devant eux, comme le bûcheron abat des arbres dans une
forêt. Ils passent continuellement d’un état violent qui exige le
déploiement des forces physiques à un état de repos, pendant
lequel ils réparent leurs pertes. Ils frappent et boivent, ils frappent et
mangent, ils frappent et dorment, pour mieux frapper encore. A ce
train de tourbillon, les qualités de l’esprit s’exercent peu. Le moral
demeure dans sa simplicité naturelle. Quand ces hommes, si
énergiques sur le champ de bataille, reviennent au milieu de la
civilisation, la plupart de ceux qui sont demeurés dans les grades
inférieurs, se montrent sans idées acquises, sans facultés, sans
portée. Aussi la jeune génération s’est-elle étonnée de voir ces
membres de nos glorieuses et terribles armées, aussi nuls
d’intelligence que peut l’être un commis, et simples comme des
enfants. A peine un capitaine de la foudroyante garde impériale est-il
propre à faire les quittances d’un journal. Quand les vieux soldats
sont ainsi, leur âme vierge de raisonnement obéit aux grandes
impulsions. Le crime commis par Castanier était un de ces faits qui
soulèvent tant de questions que, pour le discuter, le moraliste aurait
demandé la division pour employer une expression du langage
parlementaire. Ce crime avait été conseillé par la passion, par une
de ces sorcelleries féminines si cruellement irrésistibles que nul
homme ne peut dire:«Je ne ferai jamais cela,» dès qu’une sirène est
admise dans la lutte et y déploiera ses hallucinations. La parole de
vie tomba donc sur une conscience neuve aux vérités religieuses
que la Révolution française et la vie militaire avaient fait négliger à
Castanier. Ce mot terrible: Vous serez heureux ou malheureux
pendant l’éternité! le frappa d’autant plus violemment qu’il avait
fatigué la terre, qu’il l’avait secouée comme un arbre sans fruit, et
que, dans l’omnipotence de ses désirs, il suffisait qu’un point de la
terre ou du ciel lui fût interdit, pour qu’il s’en occupât. S’il était permis
de comparer de si grandes choses aux niaiseries sociales, il
ressemblait à ces banquiers riches de plusieurs millions à qui rien ne
résiste dans la société; mais qui n’étant pas admis aux cercles de la
noblesse, ont pour idée fixe de s’y agréger, et ne comptent pour rien
tous les priviléges sociaux acquis par eux, du moment où il leur en
manque un. Cet homme plus puissant que ne l’étaient les rois de la
terre réunis, cet homme qui pouvait, comme Satan, lutter avec Dieu
lui-même, apparut appuyé contre un des piliers de l’église Saint-
Sulpice, courbé sous le poids d’un sentiment, et s’absorba dans une
idée d’avenir, comme Melmoth s’y était abîmé lui-même.
—Il est bien heureux, lui! s’écria Castanier, il est mort avec la
certitude d’aller au ciel.
En un moment, il s’était opéré le plus grand changement dans les
idées du caissier. Après avoir été le démon pendant quelques jours,
il n’était plus qu’un homme, image de la chute primitive consacrée
dans toutes les cosmogonies. Mais, en redevenant petit par la
forme, il avait acquis une cause de grandeur, il s’était trempé dans
l’infini. La puissance infernale lui avait révélé la puissance divine. Il
avait plus soif du ciel qu’il n’avait eu faim des voluptés terrestres si
promptement épuisées. Les jouissances que promet le démon ne
sont que celles de la terre agrandies, tandis que les voluptés
célestes sont sans bornes. Cet homme crut en Dieu. La parole qui
lui livrait les trésors du monde ne fut plus rien pour lui, et ces trésors
lui semblèrent aussi méprisables que le sont les cailloux aux yeux de
ceux qui aiment les diamants; car il les voyait comme de la
verroterie, en comparaison des beautés éternelles de l’autre vie.
Pour lui, le bien provenant de cette source était maudit. Il resta
plongé dans un abîme de ténèbres et de pensées lugubres en
écoutant le service fait pour Melmoth. Le Dies iræ l’épouvanta. Il
comprit, dans toute sa grandeur, ce cri de l’âme repentante qui
tressaille devant la majesté divine. Il fut tout à coup dévoré par
l’Esprit saint, comme le feu dévore la paille. Des larmes coulèrent de
ses yeux.
—Vous êtes un parent du mort? lui dit le bedeau.
—Son héritier, répondit Castanier.
—Pour les frais du culte, lui cria le suisse.
—Non, dit le caissier qui ne voulut pas donner à l’église l’argent
du démon.
—Pour les pauvres.
—Non.
—Pour les réparations de l’église.
—Non.
—Pour la chapelle de la Vierge.
—Non.
—Pour le séminaire.
—Non.
Castanier se retira, pour ne pas être en butte aux regards irrités
de plusieurs gens de l’église.—Pourquoi, se dit-il en contemplant
Saint-Sulpice, pourquoi les hommes auraient-ils bâti ces cathédrales
gigantesques que j’ai vues en tout pays? Ce sentiment partagé par
les masses, dans tous les temps, s’appuie nécessairement sur
quelque chose.
—Tu appelles Dieu quelque chose? lui disait sa conscience,
Dieu! Dieu! Dieu!
Ce mot répété par une voix intérieure l’écrasait, mais ses
sensations de terreur furent adoucies par les lointains accords de la
musique délicieuse qu’il avait entendue déjà vaguement. Il attribua
cette harmonie aux chants de l’église, il en mesurait le portail. Mais il
s’aperçut, en prêtant attentivement l’oreille, que les sons arrivaient à
lui de tous côtés; il regarda dans la place, et n’y vit point de
musiciens. Si cette mélodie apportait dans l’âme les poésies bleues
et les lointaines lumières de l’espérance, elle donnait aussi plus
d’activité aux remords dont était travaillé le damné qui s’en alla dans
Paris, comme vont les gens accablés de douleurs. Il regardait tout
sans rien voir, il marchait au hasard à la manière des flâneurs; il
s’arrêtait sans motif, se parlait à lui-même, et ne se fût pas dérangé
pour éviter le coup d’une planche ou la roue d’une voiture. Le
repentir le livrait insensiblement à cette grâce qui broie tout à la fois
doucement et terriblement le cœur. Il eut bientôt dans la
physionomie, comme Melmoth, quelque chose de grand, mais de
distrait; une froide expression de tristesse, semblable à celle de
l’homme au désespoir, et l’avidité haletante que donne l’espérance;
puis, par-dessus tout, il fut en proie au dégoût de tous les biens de
ce bas monde. Son regard effrayant de clarté cachait les plus
humbles prières. Il souffrait en raison de sa puissance. Son âme
violemment agitée faisait plier son corps, comme un vent impétueux
ploie de hauts sapins. Comme son prédécesseur, il ne pouvait pas
se refuser à vivre, car il ne voulait pas mourir sous le joug de l’enfer.
Son supplice lui devint insupportable. Enfin, un matin, il songea que
Melmoth le bienheureux lui avait proposé de prendre sa place, et
qu’il avait accepté; que, sans doute, d’autres hommes pourraient
l’imiter; et que, dans une époque dont la fatale indifférence en
matière de religion était proclamée par les héritiers de l’éloquence
des Pères de l’Église, il devait rencontrer facilement un homme qui
se soumît aux clauses de ce contrat pour en exercer les avantages.