Transcript Argumentation - St. Edward's University

Argumentation
Identifying Arguments
• What Cannot be argued
– Discrete Facts without interpretation- Obama won the
2008 election
– Impossibilities (who would win the bear or the lion)
– Preferences (Mr. Pibb is better than Dr. Pepper)
– Beliefs beyond Human experience (invoking God)-
Analyzing Arguments and Evidence
• Components of a valid argument
– Examine the Accuracy
• Supporting reasons are true and accurate
• The Structure of the argument is valid
• Valid arguments have:
– An Argument (what the proponent/opponent wants)
– A well justified reason (why they want it)
• Accurate and logical
– A Policy conclusion
• The policy based on this conclusion
How to Analyze the Argument
• Is the argument empirical?
• Does the argument present any supporting
data?
• What is the source of the data? Is it
trustworthy?
Interest Groups as Actors
What is Important
• Money
What is not
• Grassroots (unless astroturf)
• Unconventional tactics
• Size
• Everything that is not on the
left hand side.
• Cohesiveness
How to determine power?
• At the Federal Level
– www.opensecrets.org
• At the State Level
– http://www.followthemoney.org/
When Looking at Politicians
Who Matters
• Must be elected, or well
known candidates
Who Does Not
• Old elected officials (George
W. Bush)
• The more senior the better
• Candidates and partieswho
do not have a chance
• The more members of their
party in the legislature, the
better
• Lower-level bureaucrats
Decision makers are more
important than non-decision
makers
An example of an Argument
• Argument: We need to insure the 30+ Million
Americans do not have health care
• Reason: Persons without health care drive up
the cost of insurance for all Americans
• Conclusion: We should implement a singlepayer plan proposed by Congress
What is missing from this argument?
What Qualifies as evidence
• Research studies and Surveys
– Method
• Phone, in person, mail
– Sample size
• Larger is better if collected properly
– Sponsor
• Many research studies are very dated
What qualifies as Evidence
• Case Studies
– An application of the policy solution to a smaller
group
• State level
• Municipal.
– Be Careful
• May not be generalizable
• Apples to oranges
• Remember that the United States is unique
What Qualifies as Evidence
• Expert Testimony
–
http://www.kvue.com/news/politics/Professor-Hutchison-campaign-on-death-watch-after-poll-83486467.html
– Can be misleading
– Personal experience is the weakest form of
evidence
• Precedents
– Previous attempts at policy
– Examine the similarities and dissimilarities
– E.g. 1994 vs. 2010 Health Care Bill
FALLACIES
Fallacies
• A way of making a persuasive argument, via a
mistake in reasoning
• Faulty Logic
Ecological Fallacy
• Using Aggregate Data to infer individual opinions. (taking
means or grouped data and using it to explain the actions
of individuals)
• Also called the fallacy of division- if the whole possesses a
quality, but the parts might not
• On Grandpa Simpson wanting to help: "Call this an unfair
generalization if you must, but old people are no good at
everything." Moe the Bartender from the Simpsons
Exception Fallacy
• Taking individual behavior and applying to a
group.
• Stereotyping
• Applying the preferences of one actor to a class
of political actors
• Using one extreme “story” to justify macro-level
policy
Hasty Generalization
• Using a small or non-representative sample to
prove a point. (a type of exception fallacy)
• I know a guy who didn’t vote for McCain,
because of Palin, so she must have cost him
the election
• Everyone I know voted for Rick Perry in Iowa,
how did he lose?
Faulty Generalization
• An example of the exception fallacy
• Evaluating all with criteria that apply only to
some
• Be wary of saying that “Democrats”,
“Republicans”, Liberals, Conservatives, believe
something. Attach names with parties.
AD HOMINEN ("to the man“)
• Discredit a person's qualities or circumstances
• Don’t trust Dick Cheney, everyone knows he’s
evil.
• Any Examples?
APPEAL TO AUTHORITY
• Expert Authorities can be useful for
argumentation (e.g. Federal Data).
• Fallacious if the authority is not really an expert
or when there are trust issues
– Because Sean Penn likes Hugo Chavez, he has to be a
good guy after all.
• Television Ad’s do this all the time with
endorsements
EMOTIONAL APPEAL
• Appeals to fear and pity with little relevance to
the issue
• Often Involve threats, pity, appeals to fear, evoke
sympathy.
• Cutesy stories
• Here is a example
SLIPPERY SLOPE
• One undesirable effect will automatically lead
to another and another
• We elect Obama and we will all be socialists,
and then communists
Argument from Ignorance
• In Logic, all hypotheses are false until proven
true.
• In this case, you assume something is true
until proven false.
– Kennedy assassination was an inside job
– 9/11 was an inside job- prove me wrong.
For Submission 2
• Present arguments that make sense
• Present arguments from actors that are
politically relevant
• Present arguments that are directly related to
the issues.
For Submission 2
• Keep writing 1 page a day or finding 1 good
source a day
• Spend at least 1 hour a day in a place where
you are most comfortable for studying
• Don’t