ARGUMENT 101

What do you think about when you see the word argument?
1. Argument attempts to resolve issues between two or more parties. 2. Argument is rational disagreement, but it can get emotional 3. Argument can result in agreement or compromise. 4. Argument is angry people yelling at each other. 5. Argument is standing up for your ideas, defending them, and minimizing the opposition by being persuasive.

What would happen if a society decided to outlaw all forms of argument?

1. 2. 3. 4. Everyone would think the same thing There would not be any progress There would be no new knowledge Life would be boring

Definition of Argument Traditional

The goal of argument is to bring about a change in an audiences initial position on a controversial issue. Depending on the situation and audience, at times this goal is achieved by an arguer who presents a claim along with reasons and evidence to convince an audience to agree with the position taken.

Examples of Traditional Argument

Public Debate-candidates for public office who want to convince their audiences to side with them and accept their points of view. Courtroom argument Single perspective argument-one person develops a perspective and argues to convince a mass audience to agree with it. One-on-one everyday argument

Definition of Argument Consensual

At other times arguers create the possibility of agreement by acknowledging different points of view and working to identify one view or a combination of views that are acceptable to most or all audience members.

Examples of Consensual Argument

Dialectic-two or more people participate as equals in a dialogue to try and discover what seems to be the best position on an issue. Academic Inquiry-to discover through reading, discussion and writing, new views, new knowledge, and new truths about complex issues. Negotiation and mediation

Argument vs. Persuasion

ARGUMENT is to discover some version of the truth, using evidence and reason. The aim of PERSUASION is to change the point of view or to move others from conviction to action. In other words, writers or speakers argue to discover some truth; they persuade when they think they know it.

Argument vs. Persuasion

Argument (discover a truth)
Persuasion (know the truth)

Conviction
Action

The basic method that argument of both types employs can be described as:
Making a claim expressing a point of view on an issue that is communicated by the arguer and Supporting it with reasons and evidence to convince an audience to change the way its participant think about the issue. All forms of productive argument include these components.

When Arguments Work Best

An Issue -an argument needs to have as its central focus an issue that has not yet been settled. An Arguer -a person who is motivated to initiate the argument, to take on the issue, to obtain and consider information, and to communicate a position to others. An Audience -an audience willing to listen to or read and consider new views or perspectives

When Arguments Work Best

Common Ground -the establishment of some common ground between the audience and arguer that is relevant to the issue. A Forum -People need forums for an argument so they can feel creative and know they will be heard. Audience Outcomes -successful arguments should produce changes in the audience.

When Argument Fails

No disagreement or reason to argue -no arguments can take place when there is no real disagreement. Risky or trivial issues -Big or risky problems that may call for radical change are difficult to argue. Difficulty in establishing common ground Standoffs or fights which result in negative outcomes

Review
1. What did you think when you encountered the word argument? Has your opinion changed? 2. What are 3 examples to illustrate the statement: Argument is everywhere 3. Describe a traditional argument and a consensual argument. 4. What are some conditions necessary for argument to work best? 5. What are some conditions that may cause argument to fail?

Activity
In pairs discuss and record characteristics and interests you have in common. (5 min) Combine pairs (4) discuss and record interests all have in common (5 min) Each group gives one minute report on what they have in common.

RHETORICAL SITUATION

Rhetorical Situation
Text-the written argument, which has the characteristics you can analyze. Reader or audience-for the text must care enough to read and pay attention. Author-writes an argument to convince a particular audience. Constraints-includes the people, events, circumstances that constrain an audience to analyze and react in a particular way. Exigence-part of the situation that signals that something controversial has occurred or is present.

Use Rhetorical Situation When You Write an Argument

The context for argument: exigence and constraints that influence both author and audience

You, the author

The text

The audience

Rhetorical Situation as Writer

Exigence: What is motivating you to write on this issue? Reader/Audience: Who is going to read/hear this? Constraint: Will your values and attitudes drive you and your opponent apart or will they help you develop common ground? Author: What do you know? What do you need to learn? Text: What should your argument look like?

CLAIMS
Types of Claims establishing purpose and organization

Claim
What do you, as the writer, intend to prove? Synonyms: thesis, controlling idea, main point, proposition The claim is the main point of the argument. Identifying the claim as soon as possible helps you focus on what the argument is about.

Types of Claims: Establishing Purpose and Organization

Claims of Fact Claims of Definition Claims of Cause Claims of Value Claims of Policy

Claims of Fact
Answers the questions: Did it happen? Does it exist? Can be an apparent statement of fact, not everyone may not agree. These facts need to be proven as either absolutely true in order for audience acceptance.

Examples
Women are as effective as men in combat The ozone layer is becoming depleted Big foot exists Men need women to civilize them It may turn out that the digital divideone of the most fashionable political slogans or recent yearsis largely fiction.
Newsweek, March 25, 2002

Organization for Claims of Fact

Chronological order: traces what has occurred over a period, usually in the order in which it occurred, can be used to develop claims of fact Claim with reasons may used to organize a fact paper The claim of fact itself is often stated near the beginning of the argument unless there is a psychological advantage for stating it at the end. Most authors make claims a fact clear from the onset

 Factual support is appropriate for claims of fact Support includes:

Facts Statistics Real examples Quotations from reliable sources When reliable authorities are used, the quotations are usually based on fact and less on opinion

Claims of Definition
Answers the questions: What is it? How should we define it? Entire arguments can center around the definition of a term. Definition is also used as a type of support, often at the beginning , to establish the meaning of one or more key terms.

Example
The debate is solely about biomedical cloning for lifesaving medical research.
New York Times op-ed, April 25, 2002

Organization for Claims of Definition

Compare and contrasttwo or more aspects are compared and contrasted throughout the essay. Topical Organizationseveral qualities, characteristics, or features of the word or concept are identified and explained. Main types of support are references to reliable authorities and accepted sources to establish clear definitions and meanings.

Claims of Cause
Answers the questions: What caused it? Or, what are its effects? People often disagree about what causes something to happen, and they disagree about the effects

Examples
Overeating causes diseases and early death A healthy economy causes people to have faith in their political leaders Sending infants to daycare results in psychological problems later in life The important issue, then, it whether antidepressants truly worsen the potential for suicide.
New York Times, May 25, 2004

Organization for Claims of Cause

Describe the cause and then the effects Effects may be described and then the cause or causes Support for establishing cause-and-effect relationship is:
Factual data including real examples and statistics Signs of certain causes and effects can also be used

Claims of Value
Answers the questions: It is good or bad? What criteria will help us decide? Aims at establishing whether the item being discussed is good or bad, valuable or not valuable, desirable or not desirable. It is often necessary to establish goodness or badness and apply them to the subject to show why something should be considered good or bad.

Examples
Private schools vs. public schools Dogs make the best pets Science fiction novels are more interesting than romance novels Computers are a valuable addition to modern society Viewing television is a wasteful activity

Detroit is a town of engineers, and engineers like to believe that there is some connection between the success of a vehicle and its technical merits.
The New Yorker, January 12, 2004

Organization of Claims of Value

Applied criteria: criteria for evaluation are established and then applied to the subject at hand. Make the claim and add a list of reasons why it is good or bad. Appeals to valuesthe arguer appeals to what the audience is expected to value. A sense of common, shared system of values between the arguer and audience is important for the argument to be convincing.

Support for Claims of Value

Motivational appeals that suggest what the audience wants are also important for the argument to be convincing. People place value on things they work to achieve Quotations from authorities who are admired help establish judgments of good or bad Examples can be used to establish that something is good or bad Definitions are used to clarify the criteria

Claims of Policy
Answer the questions: What should we do about it? What should be our future course of action? Describes a problem and then suggests ways to solve it Deciding what to do in the face of problems has always been one of the major purposes of argument.

Examples
We should stop spending so much on wars and start spending more on education Every person in the United States should have access to health care Low income families should receive health care from the government

It would benefit every man, woman, and child in this country, and it would hurt no one, to demolish prisons and replace them with much smaller, locked, secure residential schools and colleges in which the residents could acquire as much education a their intelligence and curiosity would permit.
Chronicle of Higher Education, October 16, 1978.

Organization for Claims of Policy

Problem-solutionthe problem is first described in detail that the audience will want a solution. Then the solution is spelled out.

Support
Data and statistics Moral and common sense appeals Motivational appeals-the audience needs to be motivated to think or act in a different way Appeals to values-the audience becomes convinced it should follow a policy to achieve important values Comparisons to what other groups have done Quotations from authorities Cause to establish origin of the problem and definition used to clarify it Examples can be useful to show extent of the problem and how things might turn out if accepted

PROOF Supporting the Claim

Traditional Categories of Proof

Aristotles Rhetoric, written somewhere between 360 and 334 B.C., is a key text in the history of argument. He goes into detail about broad categories of proof that can be used to establish the probability of the claim.

Traditional Categories of Proof

Aristotle distinguishes between proofs that can be produced and laid on the table like a murder weapon, fingerprints, or a written contract and proofs that are invented and represent the creative thinking and insights of clever intelligent people. He divides the second category into three subcategories.

Traditional Categories of Proof

Logical Proofslogos Proof that establishes ethos Emotional Proofpathos

Types of Logical Proof: Logos

Argument from Sign A specific visible sign is sometimes used to prove a claim. A sign can prove with certainty Someone breaks out with chicken pox and the claim is that the person with chicken pox A sign can prove the probability of a claim A race riot, is probably the sign of the claim people think they are treated unfairly

Types of Logical Proof: Logos

Argument from Induction Provides a number of examples and draws a claim in the form of a conclusion. Also called argument from generalization or argument from example An inductive argument uses examples to lead into a claim or generalization about the examples.

Types of Logical Proof: Logos

Argument from Deduction A deductive argument leads from a general principle, applies it to an example or specific case, which is described in the support and draws a conclusion which is the claim.

Types of Logical Proof: Logos

Argument from Cause Places the subject of the argument in a cause-and-effect relationship to show that it is either the cause of an effect or the effect of a cause. Can serve as an organizational pattern Historians frequently use argument from cause.

Types of Logical Proof: Logos

Argument from Historical, Literal, or Figurative Analogy Explore similarities and differences between items in the same general category We interpret what we do no know in light of what we do know.

Types of Logical Proof: Logos

Historical analogies explain what is going on now in terms of what went on in similar cases in the past. Future outcomes are often projected from past cases Literal analogies compare tow items in the same categorywhat happened in one case will happen in the other. Figurative analogies compare items from two different categories, as in metaphor, are usually spelled out in more detail than in a metaphor. Effective only when used to identify real qualities.

Types of Logical Proof: Logos

Argument from Definition Definition is extremely important in an argument. It is very difficult to argue about anything unless there is general agreement about the meanings of key terms. This is especially true when they are part of claim. Sometimes an entire argument is based on the audiences acceptance of a certain meaning of a key term.

Types of Logical Proof: Logos

Argument from Statistics Statistics describe relationships among data, people, occurrences, and events in the real world, only they do so quantitatively. Modern readers have considerable faith in numbers and statistics. Read statistical proofs carefully to determine where they came from and how reliable, accurate, and relevant they are.

Proof that Builds Credibility: Ethos

The materials provided in an argument that help the audience gain a favorable impression of the arguer or the authorities and experts the arguer cites or quotes help create ethos or the credibility of the author. The other way is to quote others or to use arguments from authority.

Argument from Authority

We are usually inclined to accept the opinions and factual evidence of people who are authorities or experts in their fields. Authors sometimes establish their own credentials by making references to various types of past experiences that qualify them to write about their subject.

Types of Emotional Proof: Pathos

Emotional proofs are appropriate in argument when the subject itself is emotional and when it creates strong feelings in both the writer and the reader. Types of emotional proof focus on motivation (what people want) and on values (what we consider good or bad, favorable or unfavorable, acceptable or unacceptable.

Types of Emotional Proof: Pathos

Motivational Proofs
Some proofs appeal explicitly to what all audiences are supposed to want Authors sometimes appeal to the opposites of these needs and values to motivate people to change their behavior. The purpose of motivational proof is to urge the audience to take prescribed steps to meet an identifiable need.

Types of Emotional Proof: Pathos

Value Proofs
Some proofs appeal to what all audiences are expected to value such as fairness, reliability, honesty, loyalty, patriotism, dependability, creativity, equality and devotion to duty. For example the author that argues for policies and laws that protect the environment is assuming you (the audience) values the environment.

Fallacies
Authors sometimes resort to using misleading evidence and faulty reasoning when they try to be convincing. Fallacies can seem convincing when they appear to support what the audience already believes or wants to believe. When you are tempted to believe an argument that does not seem logical consider why you are tempted to believe it.

Fallacies
Recognize a fallacy by asking:

Is this material relevant? Is it adequate? It is true or is it distorted? Is it oversimplified or exaggerated? Does it support the claim?

Fallacies
Avoid quoting sources that contain fallacies Avoid using them in your own writing Fallacies in your own writing, whether created by you or by the authors you choose to quote, weaken your argument and damage your ethos.