Basics of Basics of ArgumentationArgumentation

Victoria Nelson, Ph.D.

What is an argument?What is an argument?

An interpersonal An interpersonal dispute.dispute.

Argument is also:Argument is also:

A set of reasons or evidence in support of A set of reasons or evidence in support of a conclusion ( Weston).a conclusion ( Weston).

Or: a series of claims supported by Or: a series of claims supported by reasons or evidence.reasons or evidence.

What is argumentation?What is argumentation?

Argumentation can be thought of as the study of Argumentation can be thought of as the study of arguments. It is a specialized form of human arguments. It is a specialized form of human communication concerned with influencing communication concerned with influencing audiences through reasoning.audiences through reasoning.

It is both process (the act of arguing), and product It is both process (the act of arguing), and product (text).(text).

It is a dimension of the field of study knownIt is a dimension of the field of study knownas rhetoric.as rhetoric.

RhetoricRhetoric

““The ability to The ability to discover, in a discover, in a particular case, the particular case, the available means of available means of persuasion.” persuasion.”

from The Rhetoric of from The Rhetoric of AristotleAristotle

Aristotle d. 322 BCAristotle d. 322 BC

Where do we find argument?Where do we find argument?

Argument is found wherever there is Argument is found wherever there is controversy.controversy.

If we all agree, there is no need for If we all agree, there is no need for argument.argument.

If an issue is trivial, there is no need for If an issue is trivial, there is no need for argument.argument.

Claims and EvidenceClaims and Evidence

a CLAIM is a statement that the speaker a CLAIM is a statement that the speaker or arguer asks the audience to accept.or arguer asks the audience to accept.

EVIDENCE is information used to support EVIDENCE is information used to support the claim. the claim.

Types of EvidenceTypes of Evidence

StatisticsStatistics

Objective dataObjective data

Tangible objectsTangible objects

DocumentsDocuments

Scientific findingsScientific findings

Social consensusSocial consensus

Evaluating EvidenceEvaluating Evidence

Where does this evidence come from?Where does this evidence come from?Who is the source?Who is the source?Is the source qualified and competent to address Is the source qualified and competent to address this issue?this issue?Is the source reliable?Is the source reliable?Is the source biased?Is the source biased?Is the evidence relevant?Is the evidence relevant?It is current or outdated?It is current or outdated?Is it representative?Is it representative?

In general, the better the In general, the better the evidence, the better the evidence, the better the

claim.claim.

What is reasoning?What is reasoning?

Reasoning is the process by which we link Reasoning is the process by which we link the evidence to the claim.the evidence to the claim.

We can think of it as the drawing of a We can think of it as the drawing of a conclusion from the evidence.conclusion from the evidence.

We use many types of reasoning in We use many types of reasoning in argument.argument.

Reasoning may be formal or informal.Reasoning may be formal or informal.

ValidityValidity

Rather than using terms such as “right” andRather than using terms such as “right” and

““wrong,” we describe arguments as being wrong,” we describe arguments as being more or less VALID.more or less VALID.

Valid reasoning is solid, well-constructed Valid reasoning is solid, well-constructed and error free. and error free.

Deductive reasoningDeductive reasoning

Major premise: All men Major premise: All men are mortal.are mortal.

Minor premise: Socrates Minor premise: Socrates is a man.is a man.

Conclusion: Therefore, Conclusion: Therefore, Socrates is mortal.Socrates is mortal.

In deductive reasoning, In deductive reasoning, we move from the we move from the general to the specific.general to the specific.

Inductive reasoningInductive reasoning

Uses examples to move to general Uses examples to move to general conclusion.conclusion.

Less formal than deductive reasoning.Less formal than deductive reasoning.

Argument by AnalogyArgument by Analogy

An analogy is a An analogy is a comparison.comparison.

When making a When making a comparison, we need comparison, we need to determine whether to determine whether two things are more two things are more similar than they are similar than they are different.different.

NarrativeNarrative

Stories can be Stories can be persuasive.persuasive.

Narrative involves Narrative involves drama and conflict.drama and conflict.

It can appeal to our It can appeal to our emotions.emotions.

SignSign

The presence of one The presence of one thing predicts the thing predicts the presence of another.presence of another.

CauseCause

One factor has One factor has influence over influence over another, or one another, or one causes the other to causes the other to occur. occur.

AuthorityAuthority

We are persuaded by We are persuaded by people we believe are people we believe are credible, competent, credible, competent, and have good will.and have good will.

This is the concept of This is the concept of “ethos.”“ethos.”

Fallacies in ArgumentFallacies in Argument

A fallacy is a deficiency in the form of A fallacy is a deficiency in the form of argument. argument.

Fallacies result from faulty reasoning.Fallacies result from faulty reasoning.

Some common fallaciesSome common fallacies

Post hoc ergo propter hoc: “after this Post hoc ergo propter hoc: “after this therefore because of this.” therefore because of this.” Straw Man: distorting your opponent’s Straw Man: distorting your opponent’s view, then attacking the distortion.view, then attacking the distortion.Red Herring: a tactic that diverts the Red Herring: a tactic that diverts the argument away from the issue.argument away from the issue.Ad hominum: attacking the person rather Ad hominum: attacking the person rather than his or her qualification.than his or her qualification.There are many more fallacies….There are many more fallacies….

Analyzing ArgumentAnalyzing Argument

The philosopher Stephen Toulmin The philosopher Stephen Toulmin identifies several parts of the structure of identifies several parts of the structure of arguments, which can then be arguments, which can then be diagrammed.diagrammed.

According to Toulmin, the parts of an According to Toulmin, the parts of an argument consist of:argument consist of:

CLAIMS: the central assertion of the argument.CLAIMS: the central assertion of the argument.

GROUNDS: the evidence or reasons that support the GROUNDS: the evidence or reasons that support the claim.claim.

WARRANTS: used to justify the move from the grounds WARRANTS: used to justify the move from the grounds to the claim.to the claim.

BACKING: information that supports the warrant.BACKING: information that supports the warrant.

QUALIFIER: anything that modifies the strength of the QUALIFIER: anything that modifies the strength of the claim.claim.

REBUTTAL: a counterargument to the claimREBUTTAL: a counterargument to the claim

A sample diagramA sample diagram

GROUNDS GROUNDS CLAIM (qualifier)CLAIM (qualifier)

WARRANTWARRANT

BACKINGBACKING (rebuttal)(rebuttal)

Applying the Toulmin modelApplying the Toulmin model

Claim: Gays and lesbians have been Claim: Gays and lesbians have been denied their constitutional rights.denied their constitutional rights.

Grounds: they are denied the right to Grounds: they are denied the right to legally recognized marriage.legally recognized marriage.

Warrant: It is illegal to deny them the right Warrant: It is illegal to deny them the right to marry.to marry.

Backing: the Constitution provides equal Backing: the Constitution provides equal protection under the law.protection under the law.

Important reminders:Important reminders:

Pay attention to LANGUAGE. It can be Pay attention to LANGUAGE. It can be vague, confusing, connotative, or vague, confusing, connotative, or emotional. What sort of language does emotional. What sort of language does the arguer choose, and why?the arguer choose, and why?

Definition is crucial in argument. Words Definition is crucial in argument. Words may have more than one interpretation.may have more than one interpretation.

AudienceAudience

Arguments are constructed to persuade Arguments are constructed to persuade specific audiences.specific audiences.

What is persuasive to one audience might What is persuasive to one audience might be rejected by a different audience.be rejected by a different audience.

If the aim of argument is persuasion, then If the aim of argument is persuasion, then the arguer must make a claim, support it the arguer must make a claim, support it with evidence, and reason in a way that with evidence, and reason in a way that the audience will accept.the audience will accept.

We all participate in argumentWe all participate in argument

Controversy is likely to continue.Controversy is likely to continue.

In a democracy, we argue about issues In a democracy, we argue about issues rather than enforce views through rather than enforce views through violence.violence.

Public debate is essential to civic life.Public debate is essential to civic life.

The ability to understand, analyze and The ability to understand, analyze and critique arguments is the duty of every critique arguments is the duty of every citizen.citizen.