Invitational Rhetoric

    I have read Foss & Griffin before and always like the theory of Invitational Rhetoric. I think it can be used effectively in certain situations but a lot of the times it is very hard to use in practice I feel. Specifically Invitational Rhetoric I feel works very effectively in an academic and classroom setting. There are expectations, rules, and often a setting up of a comfortable atmosphere to discuss topics in a class focusing on discussion and debate. Invitational Rhetoric really focuses on bring each member of the audience or discussion into the argument in an open and inviting way to better improve upon the discussion. Like Foss & Griffin state, "As rhetors and audience members offer their ideas on an issue, they allow diverse positions to be compared in a process of discovery and questioning that may lead to transformation for themselves and others" (Foss & Griffin 6). I feel this is very important on challenging topics with no judgement as you can really learn about why someone thinks the way they do. You can also decipher their though process or opinions and look into their side of the argument. 

    Similarly to what Foss & Griffin said, "A rhetor who present her ideas at an academic colloquium, for example, engages in offering when she presents her ideas as valuable yet also as tentative" (Foss & Griffin 8). This is overall I feel really important in academia as being presented with factual, accurate, and credible information it can help you investigate the opposing sides argument and  help your own research, arguments, and opinions. Especially helping you know what to expect in a counterargument against your own argument. I feel Invitational Rhetoric is an extremely good tool in the early stages of research to really find and debate your topic and pull in as much argument and differing opinions from your own to really solidify your position in your research.