Borrowing from scientific logic, the technical writing teacher can demonstrate differences between the way researchers/writers problem solve and the way readers comprehend written reports that are roughly parallel to the differences between deductive and inductive logic. As three pyramid theories of writing and their application in university and industry classrooms demonstrate, learning both systems of logic and how to transpose one into the other enables students to understand and structure their information from their readers’ viewpoint. In this logical context, opening with the conclusion finally makes sense to most writers.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
PetersonM. S., Scientific Thinking and Scientific Writing, Reinhold Publishing Corp., New York, 1961.
2.
JohnsonT. P., Fast Functional Writing, Chemical Engineering, 76, pp. 104–110, June 30, 1969.
3.
MintoB., The Pyramid Principle, Minto, London, 1975. (Minto has since published an expanded version, Logic in Writing and Thinking, Minto International, London, 1981, which contains more case studies and examples as well as a section on problem solving techniques.)
4.
PopperK. R., The Logic of Scientific Discovery, 2nd ed., Basic Books, New York, 1958 (reprint of Vienna ed., 1934).
5.
SearlesH. L., Logic and Scientific Methods, The Ronald Press Co., New York, 1956.
6.
StebbingS. L., A Modern Introduction to Logic, Methuen, London, 1930; reprinted, 1966.
7.
LabineR. A., Writing for Publication, Effective Writing for Engineers, McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 161–162, 1974.
8.
HuxleyT. H., The Method by Which the Causes of the Present and Past Conditions of Organic Nature Are to be Discovered (1863), reprinted in The Technical Reader, AndersonW. S. and CoxD. R. (eds.), Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, pp. 88–93, 1980.
9.
Forman-FrancoB., AbramsonA. L., and SteinT., High-Speed Drill Noise and Hearing, Journal of the American Dental Association, pp. 479–482, September 1978.
