Re: tagmemics

[diepenbrock@UHCL4.CL.UH.EDU]

Hi Dagmar!  It's so nice to see a former student of mine responding with the 
somewhat obscure definition of a heuristic method.  (Gloat, gloat)  
On Tagmemics, if you want some additional explanations (aside from Young, 
Becker, and Pike) read Ross Winterowd's _Composition in the Rhetorical 
Tradition_ or Erika LIndemann's _A Rhetoric for Writing Teachers_.  This 
is Ross' brief explanation:

"The underlying premises of the heuristic are these: (1) To understand 
anything, you must know (a) how it differs from everything else in its 
class (contrast), (b) how much it can change and still be itself 
(variation), and (c) its place as a member of its class (distribution).  
(2) You can view anything as (d) a discrete entity (particle), (e) a 
process (wave), or a system (field)" (115).

I have used the example of a debutante to illustrate this:  She is part of 
a group of 25 sixteen-year olds who are coming out; she differs from the 
other girls in that she is the daughter in the first generation in her 
family to "come out" (contrast); unlike the other, more traditional girls 
in the group, she can wear a short, risque, backless, gown at the ball, 
but she will still be considered a debutante even if she also causes a 
scandal (variation); she is by far the most beautiful girl at the ball 
(distribution).  This method can be a fun and interesting way to develop 
a system of ideas.  In the above example, we have the beginning of a 
romance novel.  It is complicated and somewhat difficult to grasp, 
however.  Much like Burke's pentad, it can slip right out of your 
comprehension and become something else.  Have fun!  

Chloe Diepenbrock
University of Houston-Clear Lake