ARCS Ch3 & Aristotle Imitato discussion

While preparing for this reading post, I thought I would also include some of the information on the essay and ancient rhetor I chose for the Imitatos. I have chosen one essay by Aristotle, that is a part of his writing taken from the piece, "Rhetoric". I chose this rhetor because earlier in the text, I remember reading that he is one rhetor who especially favors the persuasive law of pathos - logic or reason. This appealed particularly to myself because I feel that I value logic and evidence when persuading others in my writing. In his essay he pay special attention to the rhetorical differences between the socially constructed roles of different people such as a judge and lawmaker. He also explains that when using rhetoric to strengthen persuasive arguments that anyone can be involved, and is unbeknownst to them in their daily life. People are often caught defending their actions or maintaining their views among regular conversations- making them rhetors of everyday life (179, RT). Aristotle makes note that it is always easier to believe in and 'back-up' beliefs that we already believe in or favor, which can be used to a rhetor's advantage.
While reading through the 3rd chapter of our ARCS readings, I was pleasantly surprised at the chapter's main focus - questions. Questions are the key to knowledge and without them a true rhetor would be without his infantry. Throughout the text I learned that there are four main types of the most important questions to ask when trying to come to stases. These four questions narrow down the stases of an argument. At which point do both sides disagree? Do they disagree on the conjecture, definition, quality, or policy? For example, some lawmakers are disputing whether GMO modified foods should be labeled in grocery stores for consumers to see. Do GMO labels exist? They can, yes. What kind of thing is labeling a GMO? It can be agreed that a GMO is a genetically-modified food, and by labeling them in stores it would become more parent to customers which foods are affected this way. The point of contention comes with the third question - Is it right or wrong (to label these GMOs in stores)? Here is where the two sides disagree, and bring voters in to decide - here by asking the four (but only needing  to ask up to the third) questions we have arrived at the stases of the argument, and form here a rhetor can gain more knowledge on the subject and the different angles to argue at this stases. It is most important for a rhetorician to ask questions and investigate arguments!