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. PersuasionArgument – 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 ArgumentThe ClaimThe SupportThe Warrant

The ClaimThe claim (also called proposition) answers

the question “What are you trying to prove?” It will generally appear as a thesis statement

of your essayThree principal types of claims:Claims of FactClaims of ValueClaims of Policy

The Claim of FactClaims 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 ValueThese 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 - ContinuedTo 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 PolicyClaims 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.

AUDIENCEYour audience is your opposition –

find their strongest claimsFind reasons and quotations to

refute the opponents claimsRhetorical context – you’re joining

the conversation on the subject that had already been going on before you joined it.

APPEALSAppeal 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 LOGICUse denotative meanings/reasonsProvide literal and historical

analogiesProvide definitionsProvide factual data and statisticsProvide quotationsProvide citations from experts and

authoritiesProvide informed opinions

APPEAL TO ETHOSUse language appropriate to audience and subject

Provide restrained, sincere, fair-minded presentation

Use appropriate level of vocabulary and correct grammar

APPEAL TO PATHOSUse vivid, concrete, emotionally loaded language

Use connotative meaningsProvide emotional examples, vivid descriptions, narratives of emotional events

Use emotional tone and figurative language

Rogerian ArgumentRogerian 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 LogicAristotle’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 - ContinuedFormal 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.

SyllogismWhile 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.

PREMISEPremise 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 - ContinuedClaim: Women should be barred from joining

military combat units.Premise 1: Women don’t have strength or endurancePremise 2:Women will hurt unit morale by introducing

sexual jealousiesPremise 3Women would be less reliable to a combat unit if

they become pregnant

EnthymemeAristotle 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 ArgumentIn 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 audience-based courtroom model. His model assumes that1.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 - ContinuedData: The evidence gathered to support a

particular claimClaim: 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 - ContinuedBacking: 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 - ContinuedData: 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 - ContinuedBacking: 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 - ContinuedThe 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 - ContinuedApplying 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 THEORYAnother 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 - ContinuedThe 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 - ContinuedArgument 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?