1235 WordsMay 11th, 20145 Pages
8 May 2014
“The Wandering Woman”
Throughout the “The Wandering Women in Rebecca” article by Richard Armstrong, the author uses a myriad of rhetorical devices in order to present this phenomenal piece of literature to a diverse audience. The phenomenal story was made into a movie, which focuses on the story based of Rebecca. The film begins in Monte Carlo on France’s Mediterranean coast. Not only is every character introduced with a distinctive and unique personality, but we also see the interaction and bonds between one another. We are briefly introduced to Maxim, a rich and handsome character, and Rebecca, who has been described as being paranoid and languorous. Next, we are introduced to…show more content…
The way she dresses lacks the reinforcement of her role in society because she simply does not dress to impress, but rather just to stay comfortable making the connection between her asexuality and the label the author gives her as a vicar’s daughter as valid syllogism. Nevertheless the soundness of the syllogism is also true and valid. Mrs. de Winter cannot find her identity in the house in which a worldly man’s wife should. A wife should be able to take control over the house, but as it shown in the article that Mrs. Danvers has all the power in the house still making Mrs. de Winter feel powerless.
The validity and soundness of the first paragraph leads to the next syllogism in the article. “Rebecca belongs less to Maxim than to Mrs. Danvers and the second Mrs. de Winter, and beneath its surface lurk feeling too powerful to be contained either by the moral code governing the Hollywood melodrama at the time or the aesthetics which shaped the melodrama” (133-134). It can be argued from this text that this in fact is not entirely true. The soundness of the syllogism is not entirely true because Rebecca use to go to the boathouse, which is the place that she used to entertain her lovers and she also used to dress up as one of Maxim’s ancestors. We then see how the second Mrs. de Winter attempts to do exactly what Rebecca did, but only to find out that she fails to succeed like Rebecca did. Mrs. de Winters insisted on going to
This resource covers using logic within writing—logical vocabulary, logical fallacies, and other types of logos-based reasoning.
Contributors: Ryan Weber, Allen Brizee
Last Edited: 2011-04-03 07:43:41
Before using logic to reach conclusions, it is helpful to know some important vocabulary related to logic.
Premise: Proposition used as evidence in an argument.
Conclusion: Logical result of the relationship between the premises. Conclusions serve as the thesis of the argument.
Argument: The assertion of a conclusion based on logical premises.
Syllogism: The simplest sequence of logical premises and conclusions, devised by Aristotle.
Enthymeme: A shortened syllogism which omits the first premise, allowing the audience to fill it in. For example, "Socrates is mortal because he is a human" is an enthymeme which leaves out the premise "All humans are mortal."
Induction: A process through which the premises provide some basis for the conclusion.
Deduction: A process through which the premises provide conclusive proof for the conclusion.
Reaching Logical Conclusions
Reaching logical conclusions depends on the proper analysis of premises. The goal of a syllogism is to arrange premises so that only one true conclusion is possible.
Consider the following premises:
Premise 1: Non-renewable resources do not exist in infinite supply.
Premise 2: Coal is a non-renewable resource.
From these two premises, only one logical conclusion is available:
Conclusion: Coal does not exist in infinite supply.
Often logic requires several premises to reach a conclusion.
Premise 1: All monkeys are primates.
Premise 2: All primates are mammals.
Premise 3: All mammals are vertebrate animals.Conclusions: Monkeys are vertebrate animals.
Logic allows specific conclusions to be drawn from general premises. Consider the following premises:
Premise 1: All squares are rectangles.
Premise 2: Figure 1 is a square.
Conclusion: Figure 1 is also a rectangle.
Notice that logic requires decisive statements in order to work. Therefore, this syllogism is false:
Premise 1: Some quadrilaterals are squares.
Premise 2: Figure 1 is a quadrilateral.
Conclusion: Figure 1 is a square.
This syllogism is false because not enough information is provided to allow a verifiable conclusion. Figure 1 could just as likely be a rectangle, which is also a quadrilateral.
Logic can also mislead when it is based on premises that an audience does not accept. For instance:
Premise 1: People with red hair are not good at checkers.
Premise 2: Bill has red hair.
Conclusion: Bill is not good at checkers.
Within the syllogism, the conclusion is logically valid. However, it is only true if an audience accepts Premise 1, which is very unlikely. This is an example of how logical statements can appear accurate while being completely false.
Logical conclusions also depend on which factors are recognized and ignored by the premises. Therefore, different premises could lead to very different conclusions about the same subject. For instance, these two syllogisms about the platypus reveal the limits of logic for handling ambiguous cases:
Premise 1: All birds lay eggs.
Premise 2: Platypuses lay eggs.
Conclusion: Platypuses are birds.
Premise 1: All mammals have fur.
Premise 2: Platypuses have fur.
Conclusion: Platypuses are mammals.
Though logic is a very powerful argumentative tool and is far preferable to a disorganized argument, logic does have limitations. It must also be effectively developed from a syllogism into a written piece.