As a current junior studying finance at Roger Williams University and minoring in public and professional writing, I have experienced many different discourse communities and experienced many different communication techniques specific in targeting a particular audience. I have written for business professionals, local organizations, and for public figures such as the president of the United States; therefore, I have acquired some experience in connecting with diverse audiences. In my current writing class, Advanced Writing for the Sciences, I have been given the opportunity to observe and practice a foreign writing style other than what I am used to; scientific rhetoric. A definition of scientific rhetoric that I believe effectively conveys its meaning can be summarized as:
“Rhetoric that is best known as a discipline that studies the means and ends of persuasion. Meanwhile, science is typically seen as the discovery and recording of knowledge about the natural world. A key contention of rhetoric of science is that the practice of science is, to varying degrees, persuasive” (“Wikipedia: Rhetoric of Science”, 2018).
One can say that scientific rhetoric is a technique to convince/ persuade “to varying degrees” someone of a scientific theory. As a finance major almost entirely consumed by the business world, some may question the relevance of studying scientific rhetoric and if its’ techniques apply to finance; however, it is more important than many may think. Rhetoric applies to all types of writing and its respective audiences, so as a finance major I interpreted this definition as “how finance professionals effectively and efficiently communicate financial recommendations to their clients (audience)”. To further analyze scientific rhetoric in finance I explored behavioral finance by illuminating rhetoric to understand how to effectively communicate with all audiences, drawing upon how the functions and features of particular genres shape scientific discourse within this particular activity system or discourse community, and interviewing a financial professional as a primary source of information I can use to support my analysis.
Upon submitting my initial draft of my preliminary analysis, I realized that I focused my writing only around defining behavioral finance, how it plays into the industry, and analyzing my interview. I ignored the true purpose of this assignment of applying rhetorical concepts I learned in class to my field of study. Additionally, I ignored drawing upon other genres and sources of information to uncover the functions and features of particular genres and how they shape scientific discourse in this discourse community. With these errors/ edits in mind I began drafting a new version of my preliminary analysis that was actually an “analysis” of rhetoric in finance. I sought out credible articles from Forbes Magazine and other financial institutions to draft a comprehensive analysis that fulfilled every requirement of this assignment.
Finally, after completing my revised preliminary analysis, I was able to connect my findings and research back to a couple of this courses learning outcomes— discourse community knowledge and rhetorical knowledge. I drew upon my discourse community knowledge in finance and rhetorical techniques we learned in class to connect it to financial communication. My rhetorical knowledge was then used to identify factors that make financial advisors succeed or fail in industry. Without the two learning outcomes described above and feedback from my original draft, I do not think that I would have been able to complete my preliminary analysis.
“Rhetoric that is best known as a discipline that studies the means and ends of persuasion. Meanwhile, science is typically seen as the discovery and recording of knowledge about the natural world. A key contention of rhetoric of science is that the practice of science is, to varying degrees, persuasive” (“Wikipedia: Rhetoric of Science”, 2018).
One can say that scientific rhetoric is a technique to convince/ persuade “to varying degrees” someone of a scientific theory. As a finance major almost entirely consumed by the business world, some may question the relevance of studying scientific rhetoric and if its’ techniques apply to finance; however, it is more important than many may think. Rhetoric applies to all types of writing and its respective audiences, so as a finance major I interpreted this definition as “how finance professionals effectively and efficiently communicate financial recommendations to their clients (audience)”. To further analyze scientific rhetoric in finance I explored behavioral finance by illuminating rhetoric to understand how to effectively communicate with all audiences, drawing upon how the functions and features of particular genres shape scientific discourse within this particular activity system or discourse community, and interviewing a financial professional as a primary source of information I can use to support my analysis.
Upon submitting my initial draft of my preliminary analysis, I realized that I focused my writing only around defining behavioral finance, how it plays into the industry, and analyzing my interview. I ignored the true purpose of this assignment of applying rhetorical concepts I learned in class to my field of study. Additionally, I ignored drawing upon other genres and sources of information to uncover the functions and features of particular genres and how they shape scientific discourse in this discourse community. With these errors/ edits in mind I began drafting a new version of my preliminary analysis that was actually an “analysis” of rhetoric in finance. I sought out credible articles from Forbes Magazine and other financial institutions to draft a comprehensive analysis that fulfilled every requirement of this assignment.
Finally, after completing my revised preliminary analysis, I was able to connect my findings and research back to a couple of this courses learning outcomes— discourse community knowledge and rhetorical knowledge. I drew upon my discourse community knowledge in finance and rhetorical techniques we learned in class to connect it to financial communication. My rhetorical knowledge was then used to identify factors that make financial advisors succeed or fail in industry. Without the two learning outcomes described above and feedback from my original draft, I do not think that I would have been able to complete my preliminary analysis.