Grant-Davie saw writing as limitless with rhetoric being involved. I would agree with this because even though the rhetoric, in my opinion, is created by an objective audience of the genre. It is still open to conversation by anyone leaving. This lead to the conclusion that rhetoric does not always have a purpose which is where I disagree. That is not how it works, or at least, not how it should. Knowledge has to be created and passed down through meaningful rhetoric and if there is no purpose the conversation is meaningless. While you can have conversation that has no basis of knowledge, those rhetorics are not memorable and typically left behind.
I really liked Greene’s point of argument being conversation as it is something I can relate to and definitely see myself using in my own research paper as a way to convey information.
The sample essay’s purpose was showing how students are better in their writing when motivated.
Beason's Blog 