introduction to arguments n.
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Introduction to Arguments

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 19

Introduction to Arguments - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Introduction to Arguments. Three Styles of Argument. Classical (Six-Part Oration) Typically a polarized argument Rogerian A qualified argument—counterargument is key Toulmin Claim, Warrant, Reason and Evidence. Classical Oration– Six-Part Oration Review.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Introduction to Arguments' - chen

Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
three styles of argument
Three Styles of Argument
  • Classical (Six-Part Oration)
    • Typically a polarized argument
  • Rogerian
    • A qualified argument—counterargument is key
  • Toulmin
    • Claim, Warrant, Reason and Evidence
classical oration six part oration review
Classical Oration– Six-Part Oration Review
  • Exordium: Win the attention/goodwill of audience while introducing a subject or problem.
  • Narration: Presents facts of the case, explaining context
  • Partition: Divides up the subject, explaining what the claim is, what the key issues are, and in what order the subject will be treated
  • Confirmation: Offers support for the claim
  • Refutation: Acknowledges and refuses opposing claims/evidence
  • Conclusion: Summarizes the claim and moves the audience to action
modified six part oration
Modified Six-Part Oration
  • Introduction
    • Gains attention
    • Establishes credibility.
    • Establishes common ground with audience.
    • States claim
  • Background
    • Presents necessary information
  • Lines of Argument
    • Presents good reasons—logical and emotional appeals—to support claim
modified six part oration1
Modified Six-Part Oration
  • Alternative Arguments
    • Examines view of opposing arguments
    • Notes advantages and disadvantages of these
    • Explains why your view is stronger
  • Conclusion
    • Summarizes argument
    • Elaborates on implications of your claim
    • Makes clear what you want the audience to think or do
    • Reinforces your credibility and could offer an emotional appeal
rogerian arguments
Rogerian Arguments
  • Based on the idea that people should not respond to one another until they can fully, fairly, and even sympathetically state the other person’s position
    • Qualified Arguments
  • Rhetors concede that alternatives to their claim exist
    • Some alternatives might even be reasonable in certain circumstances
  • Meant to promote compromise
rogerian arguments structure
Rogerian Arguments – Structure
  • Introduction
    • Describe the issue, problem, or conflict
      • Shows that the rhetor understands and respects any alternative positions
  • Contexts
    • Discuss contexts, situations in which the alternative views might be valid
  • Writer’s Position
    • States the rhetor’s position and the circumstances in which it is valid
  • Benefits to opponent
    • Explains to opponents how they would benefit from adopting the rhetor’s position
toulmin argument
Toulmin Argument
  • Acknowledge the complications of life in arguments
    • Situations in which the rhetor says sometimes, often, presumably, unless, and almost
  • Requires the readers to test their ideas and analyze arguments
toulminian arguments

Start with an enthymeme

    • Claim + Reason(s)
  • But there’s so much more!
  • Here we go!
Toulminian Arguments

Claim + Reason

Grounds = evidence



Claim + Reason

Warrant = underlying assumption




All enthymemes have underlying assumptions

  • “We should slash the deficit because it’s too big.”
    • WARRANT: Having a large deficit is bad for the nation.
  • “Everyone should recycle because it will save the planet.”
    • WARRANT: The planet is worth saving.

There can be MULTIPLE warrants in an enthymeme

  • “Even hate groups should be allowed to hold rallies in public places.”
    • WARRANT: Freedom of speech applies to everyone.
    • WARRANT: Freedom of speech is vital to the continued existence of our nation.
more caution
  • If warrants aren’t controversial, there is likely no need to state or explain them.
    • Example: The mushroom is poisonous, so don’t eat it!
      • WARRANT: Eating poisonous things is dangerous.
  • Controversial warrants need to be justified a bit more, and can lead to faulty arguments.
    • Example: Grades in high school should be abolished because I don’t like them.
      • WARRANT: What I don’t like should be abolished.
a toulminian argument

Claim + Reason






BACKING= justification for the warrant

  • WARRANT: Freedom of speech is good.
    • Backing:
      • Allows minority voices to be heard
      • Ensures no one is being oppressed
      • Fosters informed citizenry
two things missing here


    • Probably, in my opinion, usually, often, etc.
    • “That movie will probably be good because the director has made lots of other good movies.”
    • “While schools should be able to teach sex edbecause it’s vital for teen safety, instructors should also take into account the culture and religious beliefs of their students.”
  • Concessions/Rebuttals
    • Exceptions to the claim
    • “That movie will probably be good because the director has made lots of other good movies. Except his last one. That stunk.”
Two Things Missing Here