Transcript ARGUMENT - ENGLISH 1 A

Argument Essays & Terms
ARGUMENT IN ACADEMIC WRITING
 An argument in academic writing is presenting a
controversial issue fairly by providing support for both
sides of the debate while taking a stance by making
your major point clear and supporting it with
evidence.
 Fair presentation means addressing the opposition by
answering their strongest arguments.
 Support for an argument paper means quotations from
evaluated sources for your claim and for the major
claims of the opposition.
Argument Vs. Persuasion
 Argument – all language has an argumentative edge to
make a point, to invite others to enter a space of
mutual regard and exploration
 Persuasion – to change a point of view or to move
others from conviction to action
The Terms of Argument
The Claim
The Support
The Warrant
The Claim
 The claim (also called proposition) answers the
question “What are you trying to prove?”
 It will generally appear as a thesis statement of your
essay
Three principal types of claims:
 Claims of Fact
 Claims of Value
 Claims of Policy
The Claim of Fact
 Claims of fact assert that a condition has existed,
exists, or will exist and are based on facts or data.
 These claims are about facts that are not easily
determined or about definitions that are debatable:
 Fast foods are contributing significantly to today’s
epidemic of childhood obesity.
 Do grades measure achievement?
Claims of Value
 These types of claims attempt to prove hat some things
are more or less desirable than others. They express
approval or disapproval of standards of taste and
morality:
The right to privacy is more important than the need to
increase security at airports.
Is behavior modification a good therapy for anxiety? Is it
ethical to use steroids in sports?
Claims of Value - Continued
To structure an argument based on
the claim of value, you must
establish the criteria of evaluation
Use examples to show how the
contested case meets the criteria
Claim of Policy
 Claims of policy assert that specific policies should be
instituted as solutions to problems (a call for action):
 The electoral college should be replaced by popular
vote as the means of electing a president.
 Attempts at making air travel more secure must not be
put in jeopardy the passengers’ right to privacy.
 Backscatter x-raying ought to be implemented at every
American airport as soon as possible as a means of
detecting concealed weapons.
AUDIENCE
 Your audience is your opposition – find their
strongest claims
 Find reasons and quotations to refute the
opponents claims
 Rhetorical context – you’re joining the
conversation on the subject that had already
been going on before you joined it.
APPEALS
 Appeal to logos– argumentative
appeals to logic and reason (facts,
statistics, logical reasoning)
 Appeal to ethos - argumentative
appeals to values and credibility
(trustworthiness of the speaker)
 Appeal to pathos - argumentative
appeals to emotions
APPEAL TO LOGIC
 Use denotative meanings/reasons
 Provide literal and historical analogies
 Provide definitions
 Provide factual data and statistics
 Provide quotations
 Provide citations from experts and
authorities
 Provide informed opinions
APPEAL TO ETHOS
 Use language appropriate to audience
and subject
 Provide restrained, sincere, fairminded presentation
 Use appropriate level of vocabulary and
correct grammar
APPEAL TO PATHOS
 Use vivid, concrete, emotionally loaded
language
 Use connotative meanings
 Provide emotional examples, vivid
descriptions, narratives of emotional
events
 Use emotional tone and figurative
language
Rogerian Argument
Rogerian argument- named after psychologist Carl
Rogers – s a kind of negotiated argument where
understanding and compromise replace the
traditional, adversarial approach.
Rogerian, or nonthreatening, argument opens the lines
of communication by reducing conflict.
Crucial to Rogerian argument is the fact that
convictions and beliefs are not abstract but reside in
people.
Rogerian Argument (Continued)
It appeals to character and uses reason and
logic, while its primary goal is not to “win”
the argument, but to establish common
ground and to reach a solution.
Mutual communication allows both sides
become more flexible and find a
compromise or solution that would satisfy
both sides.
Aristotle’s Formal Logic
Aristotle’s claim that all arguments can be reduced to
just two components:
Statement + Proof
Another way of naming these parts is
Claim + Supporting Evidence
Aristotle - Continued
Formal Logic and Syllogism
In the absence of hard facts, claims may be supported
with other kinds of compelling reasons. The formal
study of principles of reasoning is called LOGIC – a
syllogism – a vehicle of deductive reasoning.
Syllogism
While inductive reasoning moves from a set of
specific examples to a general statement, deductive
reasoning moves from a general statement to a specific
conclusion. It works on the model of syllogism, a
simple three-part argument that consists of a major
premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion:
All human beings are mortal.
Socrates is a human being.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
PREMISE
Premise is a proposition antecedently supposed or
proved as a basis of argument or inference ; premise is
also called a reason, which is a claim to support
another claim.
 Either of the first two propositions of a syllogism from
which the conclusion is drawn
 Something assumed or taken for granted
PREMISE - Continued
 Claim: Women should be barred from joining military






combat units.
Premise 1:
Women don’t have strength or endurance
Premise 2:
Women will hurt unit morale by introducing sexual
jealousies
Premise 3
Women would be less reliable to a combat unit if they
become pregnant
Enthymeme
Aristotle used the term ENTHYMEME to describe a
very ordinary kind of sentence that includes both a
claim and a reason:
Enthymeme = Claim + Reason
A because clause attached to a claim is an incomplete
logical structure called an enthymeme.
Enthymeme - Continued
Claim: Women should be allowed to join combat units
Reason: because the image of women in combat would
help eliminate gender stereotypes
Underlying assumption:
Gender stereotypes are harmful and should be
eliminated
The Toulmin Method of Argument
In The Uses of Argument (1958), British philosopher
Stephen Toulmin argued against formal logic and the
concepts of deduction and induction to written
arguments. Instead, he suggested a very audiencebased courtroom model. His model assumes that
1. All assertions and assumptions are contestable by
“opposing counsel” and that
2. All final “verdicts” about the persuasiveness of the
opposing arguments will be rendered by a neutral
third party, a judge or jury
Toulmin Method - Continued
 Data: The evidence gathered to support a particular
claim
 Claim: The overall thesis the writer hopes to prove.
This thesis may be a claim of fact or definition, of
cause and effect, of value, or of policy.
 Warrant: The statement that explains why or how the
data support the writer’s claim
Toulmin Method - Continued
 Backing: The additional logic or reasoning that, when
necessary, supports the warrant.
 Qualifier: The short phrases that limit the scope of
the claim, such as “typically,” usually, or on the whole.
 Exceptions: Those particular situations in which the
writer does not or would not insist on the claim.
Toulmin Method - Continued
 Data: Pornographic images on the Internet bombard
children with images that dehumanize women and
degrade human dignity.
 Claim: (therefore) the government should regulate
Internet pornography.
 Warrant: (Since) government regulation is an effective
way to reduce children’s exposure to pornographic
images.
Toulmin Method - Continued
 Backing: Government regulations already exists in
print, radio, and television media, so it should be
extended to the Internet.
 Qualifier: In most cases, the government should
regulate pornography on the Internet.
 Exceptions: Government regulations must protect
children, but where children are not involved,
regulation may not be as urgent.
Toulmin Method - Continued
 The Toulmin method is especially helpful when we
read texts for their logical strengths and weaknesses
 As we critically read texts, not all of us find the same
warrant statements, because there can be several ways
of explaining a logical connection between the data
and the stated claim.
Toulmin Method - Continued
 Applying the Toulmin model and using warrants,
backing, qualifiers, and exceptions becomes more
important when our readers are likely to disagree with
us
 Just as Rogerian argument tries to reduce conflict in
adversarial situations through mutual communication
and a strong appeal to character, the Toulmin model
helps communicate in adversarial contexts by
being especially reasonable and logical.
STASIS THEORY
 Another way of categorizing arguments is to consider
their status or stasis – the kinds of issues they address.
 This categorization system is called Stasis Theory– in
ancient Greek and Roman civilizations, rhetoricians
defined a series of questions by which to examine legal
cases.
STASIS THEORY - Continued
The questions would be posed in sequence, because
each depended on the question preceding it:
 Did something happen?
 What is its nature?
 What is its quality?
 What actions should be taken?
STASIS THEORY - Continued
 Argument of Fact - Did something happen?
 Argument of Definition – What is the nature of the
thing? Which category does it belong to? A question of
definition allows us to be persuasive: Is human fetus a
human being?
 Argument of Evaluation - What is the quality of the
thing? You measure against certain criteria
 Proposal Arguments – Claim of Policy - What actions
should be taken?