Argumentation

1. Argumentation

2. Types of Arguments • Arguments of fact • Arguments of value • Arguments of policy

3. Arguments of Fact • State that something is or is not the case. • These arguments basically try to establish one of two things:(1) Whether something exists or not (Is bigfoot real? Is there arsenic in the king's food?)(2) Whether claims made about something are true (Did Mr. Mustard kill Mrs. Plum in the library with the revolver? Is global warming affecting our climate?)(3) Relies heavily on hard evidence rather than mere logic or reasonHow do facts become arguments? • (1) The facts are controversial in themselves.(2) When facts are driven by perceptions and evidenceWhen might an argument of fact be used? • (1) Something has been recently discovered(2) Crime scenes • (3) Is USUALLY developed inductivelyWhat is NOT a good subject for argument of fact? • (1) Can easily be answered with simple researchInquiries for Arguments of Fact • (1) Is social security going broke?(2) Is racism at the root of our current dislike of the President?(3) Is the economy recovering?(4) Is gun control the answer to eliminate mass murder?(6) Why isn't the coverage of the flooding in New Jersey/New York given the same depth or response as the effects of Hurricane Katrina? • Causal arguments One event or condition leads to another or is likely to: (1) AP students do better in college. (2) Computers enhance learning in the classroom. (3) Media is responsible for the shortening of the attention span. (4) Mercury in the food chain or cigarette smoke in the air causes cancer.

4. Arguments of Value • State that something is or is not desirable. They involve evaluations of quality or worth according to accepted criteria. For example, one might assert that this or that novel or film is of significant merit, that preemptive war is or is not a justifiable practice, that Barack Obama is or is not a good president, or that health concerns take precedence over profit.

5. Arguments of Policy • State that something should or should not be done. They make recommendations for practice or implementation. For example, that the minimum wage should be increased, that stem cell research should be funded, that Huck Finn should or should not be part of the curriculum, that gay marriage should or should not be legalized, that more students should have access to AP, that the designated hitter should be eliminated from baseball, or that smoking should be banned from public places. This kind of argument will naturally contain components—often included as support—of those of fact and value, as my final example in each category illustrates.

6. How do we organize? • Identify your SOAPS for writing. Specifically, identify your intended audience. • Important to identify audience to determine whether they are more likely to agree or to disagree with your claim. • Build the bridge between your audience, the sources, and yourself • Determine the appropriate support to target that audience.

7. Classical Pattern of Argumentation(Latin) • Exordium: Introduction to issue • Narration: Background of the problem • Proposition: Thesis and main arguments • Confirmation: Arguments • Refutation: Anticipation and refutation • Peroration: Conclusion, summary, call, final emotional appeal

8. Toulmin Model • More of an analytical model (or technique to analyze argument) than a strict pattern to follow for writing. Can be useful when planning your argument Parts of the Model: • A claim is an assertion. It should seem a “conclusion whose merits we are seeking to establish,” in Toulmin’s words, or “the conclusion you reach after testing the evidence that supports your belief,” as Kathleen Bell puts it in Developing Arguments. • The support consists of the data used as evidence, reasons, or grounds for the claim. • A warrant expresses the assumption necessarily shared by the speaker and the audience (bridging the gap). Similar to the second premise of a syllogism (deductive), it serves as a guarantee, linking the claim to the support.

9. Toulmin Continued • Backing consists of further assurances or data without which the warrant lacks authority. • A qualifier, when used (e.g., “usually,” “probably,” “in most cases,” “most likely”), restricts the terms of the claim and limits its range, indicating the degree of strength delivered by the warrant. • A reservation explains the terms and conditions necessitated by the qualifier. • A rebuttal gives voice to objections, providing the conditions that might refute or rebut the warranted claim.

10. Toulmin Graphic • Toulmin states it this way: Data, so (qualifier) claim, since warrant, on account of backing, unless reservation. OR, AP TEACHERS SAY… • Because (data as support), therefore, or so (qualifier?) (claim), since (warrant), because, or on account of (backing), unless (reservation). Simple Example: • “Because it is raining, I should probably take my umbrella, since it will keep my head dry on account of its impervious or waterproof material, unless, of course, there is a hole in it.” • Moderate Example: “Because of the new cell phone law, in most cases, no one should call while driving since it is good to obey the law because if the law is broken it mean a heavy fine unless there is an emergency.” • Advanced Example: • NEXT SLIDE

11. Toulmin Advanced Example Because we’re seeing increased obesity among students—obesity that has its origins in the amount of sugar consumed, which will inevitably lead to heart disease and diabetes—contingent upon administrative approval, all sweetened soft drinks should be removed from the school’s vending machines, and only kept available for emergency situations for those students who suffer reservation from medical conditions like diabetes.

12. Toulmin At Work • Data --------------------------------------- Claim (It is raining.) (I should take my umbrella.) ↑ ↑ ↑ Warrant Qualifier Reservation (It will keep me dry.) (Probably.) (Unless it has a hole in it.) ↑ • Backing (The material is impervious or waterproof)

13. Rogerian • Rogerian Argument Model • (Based on Carl Rogers's studies in psychotherapy)  Use the Rogerian model when you need to bridge a gap between yourself and your audience. It is often suggested by the higher powers that be in the rhetoric world to use this model when your audience is hostile and non-conciliatory (I feel that this model can be used in less volatile circumstances as well). This method is also known as the non-adversarial or WIN-WIN argument model. Follow these steps: • Introduction Discuss the issue, what's at stake and any context required for your readers to understand the argument. II. Explain the Opposing View Articulate this in objective language--your intent here is not to prejudice the reader but rather to educate and to verify that you as arguer understand the opposing view correctly. III. Describe Your Views While probably not done completely objectively, this is an important stage in the process: simply explain what reasons you have for choosing your stance. IV. Find Common Ground Whereas the "Proof" stage in the classical model is key for success, here the need to find common ground is essential for the success of the Rogerian method. On what can you and your opponent agree?  V. Offer a Compromise In light of step four, craft a resolution that borrows the best from both sides and offers a negotiated settlement somewhere in the middle**This can be adjusted according to need

14. Narration • Narration can be used for argumentation, but sparingly (Think Douglass, Ehrenreich, Dillard; George Orwell was the master of narrative as argument. Check him out). For our purposes, we will not be using it. • Actually, much prose is argumentative in nature. Poetry, too. Maybe we will look at this…time permitting.

15. Modes of Writing • Argumentation incorporates different modes of writing (check previous notes) into writing. • NO MODEL IS PERFECT AND NO MODEL WORKS 100 PERCENT OF THE TIME! • MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR IS AUDIENCE! What are their needs? What do you have to do to get their attention and to persuade them to accept your views? • Remember, sources enhance your views, not shape them.