Resumen de A content‐analysis test of Richard M. Weaver's critical methodology

James J. Floyd, W. Clifton Adams

• Since the appearance in 1953 of Richard M. Weaver's novel analysis of the rhetoric of Burke and Lincoln, scholars in the field of communication have repeatedly questioned the representativeness of the examples Weaver used to support his conclusions. The present study tests the validity of Weaver's conclusion that Lincoln habitually argued from genus and that Burke habitually argued from circumstance. The study rests on an examination of three speeches, randomly selected from the career of each speaker, and is conducted in terms of Weaver's hierarchy of “the sources of argument.” The results fully support Weaver's conclusions in the case of Lincoln. In the case of Burke, Weaver's conclusions are upheld—but in a qualified sense.