Inventing arguments chap 1 2
Transcript of Inventing arguments chap 1 2
![Page 1: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Inventing Arguments
Chapters 1-2 Information
College Comp II
![Page 2: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Argument
• An argument is the act of asserting, supporting, and defending a claim.
• A claim is the statement the author makes that he/she is trying to convince the reader is true.
• Argument is found everywhere around us from commercials to text and media.
![Page 3: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Argument Cont.
• Argument does not always involve beating an opponent, but it deals with making others see the wisdom of a position or perspective.
• Each academic area has its own arguments on the fields of study within the dicipline.
![Page 4: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Argument Cont.
• Many often say that everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion; however, this ignores how people actually work together to build, transform, and trading opinions.
• Opinions are only just that
if not accurately supported.
![Page 5: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Rhetoric
• Rhetoric is a process of recognizing and using the most effective strategies for influencing thought.
• Every time someone offers information, describes something a particular way, or arranges information in a particular way so that someone else will accept a claim, he or she is making rhetorical decisions.
![Page 6: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Five Categories of Rhetoric
• Invention: the discovery and development of ideas
• Arrangement: the organization of ideas in a coherent and engaging fashion
• Style or voice: the personal or individualized use of language conventions, with attention to appropriateness, situation, and audience
![Page 7: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Five Categories of Rhetoric Cont.
• Memory: the recollection of prepared points
• Delivery: the presentation of ideas
![Page 8: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Rhetorical Situation
• The rhetorical situation refers to an opportunity to address a particular audience about a disputed or disputable issue.
• Is an opportunity to gather and use the available means of persuasion
• Involves exigence—an occasion when something happens or does not happens that results in some uncertainty.
![Page 9: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Rhetorical Situation
• Includes:– Exigence– Arguer (Speaker/writer)– Audience– Method of communication– Rules of communication– Text message
• None are independent from each other
![Page 10: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
The Academic Essay and Rhetoric
• The student is usually the speaker/writer.
• The audience is normally the student’s peers and instructor.
• The rules are defined by the syllabus and the assignment, which is the exigence or opportunity to address the audience and make an assertion
![Page 11: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Academic Essay Cont.
• A savvy writer will include social, cultural, and historical situations to his/her advantage.
• They will try to make a conncetion by sharing the audience’s values, assumptions, emotions, and beliefs as well as cultural, past and present political trends, discoveries, local events, and widely used literature.
![Page 12: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Academic Essay Cont.
• In academic writing, the writer brings forward unfamiliar topics while introducing them in new and revelatory situations.
• They do not reinforce what the audience already thinks, but bring in new claims, assumptions, hopes, and even fears.
![Page 13: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Structure of Argument: Claims
• The claim is the main argumentative position (or thesis) being put forward.
• Support give substance and legitimacy to a claim and allows or convinces the audience to accept the claim. – Facts– Statistics– Scenarios– Appeals to logic, emotion, character, value, & need
![Page 14: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Argument Structure: Claims Cont.
• Basic format for an argument is a claim with support information.
• More complex form is to give a main claim and then give the subclaims or supporting claims with support information for those subclaims/supporting claims.
![Page 15: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Types of Claims
• Claims of fact: argue that a condition exists, has existed, or will exist. (Facts must be proven to be truth.)
• Claims of value: argue that something possesses or reflects a particular quality whether it be good/bad, unreasonable, practical, unfair, fair, etc.
![Page 16: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Types of Claims Cont.
• Claims of policy: argue that some action should be taken or some change made. This requires some change in behavior, policy, approach, or even attitude.
![Page 17: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Characteristics of Claims
• Focused claims: guide the reader’s and writer’s attention to a specific issue, even to a particular aspect of a specific issue. This means a focused thesis to gain depth.
• Arguable claims: make assertions that could be challenged on various grounds that invite or directly address opposition.
![Page 18: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Characteristics of Claims Cont.
• Revelatory: writing attempts to do more than argue for the opinions, but it reveals an unfamiliar topic or reveal a new layer of a familiar topic. The object is to change the reader’s thinking.
• A good thesis statement is a declarative sentence with three subtopics/claims, and it comes as the last sentence in the introduction of the essay.
![Page 19: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Arguable Claim Issues
• A thesis statement is not a question.
• It does not state an obvious fact.
• It invites several positions or multiple perspectives on the same topic.
![Page 20: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Argument Structure: Support
• Called grounds or proof, support comes in many forms:– Evidence: authorities, testimony, facts,
statistics– Examples: allusions, anecdotes, illustrations,
scenarios– Appeals: to logic, emotion, character, value,
need
![Page 21: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Evidence
• Evidence support already exists.– Authorities: are experts who offer specialized
knowledge—give credibility to a writer’s claim• Support own claim• Support opposing claims• Help explain a topic• Help to give some history or context to argument
![Page 22: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Evidence Cont.
– Testimony: eyewitness or firsthand account
– Facts: agreed-upon bits of knowledge that do not require further support in an argument
– Statistics: figures drawn from surveys, experimentation, and data analysis
![Page 23: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Examples
• Examples are specific occurrences of a phenomenon.
– Allusions: references to some public knowledge from history, current events, popular culture, religion, or literature. Used for formal essays, informal articles, and literary works.
![Page 24: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Examples Cont.
– Anecdote: short accounts of a particular event or incident and often presented as brief stories that support the arguer’s claim.
– Illustrations: graphic descriptions or representations of an idea by carefully describing the details to create an image in the reader’s mind.
![Page 25: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Examples Cont.
– Scenarios: fictional or hypothetical examples and can support just about any argumentative claim
![Page 26: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Appeals
• Sometimes called reasoning, appeals are major forms of support that help the arguer create a connection between the audience and the topic. – Advertisements are probably the most
abundant examples of appeals used.
![Page 27: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Appeals Cont.
• Appeals to Character: draw attention to the arguer’s personal nature, integrity, experience, wisdom, or personality. Fend off doubts about arguer’s credibility and make the audience comfortable so as to accept the arguer’s claim.
![Page 28: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Appeals Cont.
• Appeals to logic: usually done with statistics and facts. Line of reasoning or logic appeals to engaging the audiences intellect and reasoning.
– Inference: process of deriving a logical conclusion based on premises known to be true; logical step from one idea to another
![Page 29: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Appeals Cont.
• Line of reasoning: refers to a series of logical steps that lead arguer and audience to a main claim. – Type of Reasoning:
• Deductive logic: builds a conclusion from accepted premises or general principles
• Inductive logic: builds a conclusion from particular observations or examples
• Analogical logic: borrows the logic from one situation and applies it to another.
![Page 30: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Appeals: Reasoning Cont.
• Deductive reasoning allows the arguer to conclude only what the premises allow; even if it is false, the logic may be valid. – Found behind legal or ethical decisions– Syllogisms: are lines of deductive reasoning
that require three steps—premise 1 + premise 2= Conclusion
• Require support and sometime significantly more reasoning, examples, or evidence to be accepted as truth.
![Page 31: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Appeals: Reasoning Cont.
• Enthymemes: are not certain in all situations but emerge in particular situations; contain a number of steps or premises—more than three; contain a missing or unstated premise—those that are obvious are often not state.
– Do not require a lot of support, if any, to be taken as truth
![Page 32: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Appeals Cont.
• Appeals to Emotion: bring about some type of emotional reaction from the reader.– Can be used dishonestly and should be used
sparingly.
• Appeals to Need: make a connection between the subject and a basic human need such as food, shelter, belonging, intimacy, self-realization, etc. – Reach inside an audience to people’s essential
requirements of living
![Page 33: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Appeals Cont.
• Appeals of Value: connection between the topic and general value of fairness, equality, honor, kindness, selflessness, duty, responsibility, economics, pragmatics, etc. – Values may compete with one another, so
good arguers know how to bring a particular value to the forefront and make it seem the most important or pressing one.
![Page 34: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Appeals: Reasoning Cont.
• Inductive reasoning: builds from a specific point or premises and leads to a general claim or conclusion. – Deductive vs. induction: go together constantly
in everyday life and often operate in the same argument.
– Deductive arguments reinforce some standing assumptions people have while inductive arguments create particular benefits or liabilities in people’s minds.
![Page 35: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Appeals: Reasoning Cont.
• Analogical reasoning: depends on comparisons or analogies. – Arguer moves from one particular to another
particular through the use of comparisons, metaphors, allegories, parables, and examples.
![Page 36: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Other Elements of Argument
• Counterargument: refute claims or positions opposed to those that the writer or speaker is trying to prove. It is often called refuting the opposition. – Good arguers carefully examine others’
positions and try to imagine contrary points to help draw a clear distinction between the two camps of thought.
![Page 37: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Other Elements of Argument Cont.
• Concession: involves acknowledgement or granting value to an opposition claim and usually done through qualifiers. – Concede the good points that an opposition
may make and qualifying others makes for a strong argument. (The ideas the arguer agrees with the opposition on.)
![Page 38: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Other Elements of Argument Cont.
• Qualifiers: they acknowledge the limits of an arguer’s claims. By qualifying one’s claims, the arguer acknowledges there are limitations.– Words such as perhaps, seems, maybe,
some, several, many, could, and might.
![Page 39: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Logical Fallacies
• Ad hominem: attack the person instead of the idea the person puts forth—often seen in politics and everyday life.
• Straw person: misrepresenting a position and then proving it wrong.
• Post hoc, ergo propter hoc: faulty cause-effect that one thing happened before another when they are not really related
![Page 40: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Logical Fallacies Cont.
• Either/or: claims only two opinions exist when there are more.
• Hasty generalizations: draw conclusions based on too little evidence.
• Non sequitur: skips or confuses logical steps—does not follow logic.
• Slippery slope: claims that a certain way of thinking or acting will necessarily lead to more of the same
![Page 41: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Logical Fallacies Cont.
• Begging the question: no support is provided, but only the restating of the claim.
• Red herring: deliberate attempts to change the subject.
• Bandwagon: everyone else is doing it, you should, too because it is commonplace that makes it okay.
![Page 42: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Logical Fallacies Cont.
• Association: claims that two people or things share a quality just because they are somehow associated, connected, or related.
![Page 43: Inventing arguments chap 1 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5558782ad8b42a8d018b5458/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Toulminian Logic
• Six Components:– Claim: conclusions or assertion– Support: appeals, evidence, and examples– Warranting Assumption: statement to connect
claim and support in logical way– Backing: evidence that supports warrant– Modal Qualifiers: words or phrases that limit
scope– Rebuttal: refutes an opposing claim or charge