Day 4 Argument Types

8/3/2019 Day 4 Argument Types

1/42

1

COM 234 Public DebateDay 4 Lecture

Todays Agenda:

The Toulmin ModelArgument Types


2/42

2

Announcements

Form of Assignments: Make sure to follow the form on the sample. Thismeans including your section number, TAs name,the name of the assignment, etc.

While following the form of the sample, youshould not use any of the examples used in class.

Extra credit attempts: E-mail these by 10a.m. the day before the assignment is due [email protected]

RMC Todays extra credit earners
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


3/42

3

The Toulmin Model

Claim: the proposition that the arguer issupporting

Grounds (or data): the specific evidence or

reason used to support the claim (oftenintroduced with the word because orsince; sometimes this is the claim of

another argument)Warrant: the inference that allows you to

move from the grounds to the claim (often

only implied in the argument)


4/424

Syllogism and Toulmin Model

Compared

Claim ConclusionGrounds minor premise

Warrant

Major Premise


5/425

Toulmin Model Diagram

Grounds Claim

Warrant


6/42


7/427

Types of Argument

argument by example argument by analogy

argument from sign argument from cause

argument from testimony argument from narrative


8/42

8

Argument by Example

Inference moves from specific togeneral or from general to specific

Warrant to this argument usually readswhat is true in this case (or these

cases) is true in general or what istrue in general is true in this case


9/42

9

Argument by Examplefrom David Horsey, Seattle PI, 15 March 2005.


10/42

10

Horsey Argument by Example Diagrammed

hey whined when

seat belts, catalyticconverters, airbags,fuel efficiency

standards, andemission standardswere introduced.

Automakers whine that

the industry will beruined whenever

legislation is introduced

to improve vehicles.

What is true in these

cases is true in general.


11/42

11

Argument by Example from David Brooks, A HouseDivided, and Strong,NYT, 5 April 2005, p. A27.

Once, Republicans were isolationists.Now most Republicans, according to a

New York Times poll, believe the U.S.

should try to change dictatorships intodemocracies when it can. Meanwhile,

78 percent of Democrats believe theU.S.should nottry to democratize

authoritarian regimes.


12/42

12

Brooks Argument by Example Diagrammed

78% of those polled

by the NYTwhoidentified as

Democrats said the

US should not try todemocratize

authoritarian

regimes.

78% of Democratsbelieve the US shouldnot try to democratizeauthoritarian regimes.

What is true in these

cases is true in general.


13/42

13

Argument by Example moving from general to specific

Since youre a Democrat, you probablybelieve the U.S. should not try to

democratize authoritarian regimes.


14/42

14

Argument by Example Diagrammed

78% of Democratssay the US shouldnot try todemocratize

authoritarianregimes.

As a Democrat, you

probably believe the USshould not try to

democratize

authoritarian regimes.

What is true in general

is true in this case.


15/42

15

Tests for the Argument by

Example

Are there enough examples to provethe point?

Are the examples skewed toward one

type of thing?Are the examples unambiguous?

Could it be that the connection ofgeneral and specific doesnt hold in thiscase?


16/42

16

Argument by Analogy

Inference compares two similar things, sayingthat since they are alike in some respects,they are alike in another respect. It can be a

figurative analogy or a literal analogy.

Warrant to this argument usually reads iftwo things are alike in most respects, theywill be alike in this respect too.


17/42

17

Argument by Analogy (Figurative)from David Horsey, Seattle PI, 15 March 2005.


18/42

18

Argument by Analogy (Figurative) Diagrammed

Texas barbecues

create danger tothe house by

adding fuel to a

tremendous fire.

Bush and Delay are

creating a dangeroussituation that threatensthe nation by adding

tax cuts to a federaldeficit.

If two things are alike in

some respects, theyll be

alike in this respect.


19/42

19

Argument by Analogy from Mike Henderson, BeltresNumbers,Seattle Weekly, 9-15 March 2005, p. 16.

When one of the greatest Hall of Famethird basemen, Mike Schmidt, turned

25, he had 36 home runs, 116 RBI, a

.282 batting average, and committed 26errors. New Seattle Mariner third

baseman Adrian Beltre, who just turned25, has better numbers than that. We

should expect great things from him.


20/42

20

Argument by Analogy (Literal) Diagrammed

Mike Schmidt did

great things as hematured, and his

stats were similar to

Adrian Beltres atage 25.

We should expect great

things of Adrian Beltre.





21/42

21

Tests for the Argument by

Analogy

Are the two things really alike, or arethere significant differences that mightmake them unalike in this respect.

Is the analogy appropriate, or does it

confuse things? [See Scooter Indictment clip]


22/42

22

The Officevideo clip

ou dont blamedrug dealers forpassing alongillegal drugs.

ou shouldnt blame

me for forwardinginappropriate and time-wasting e-mails in the

office.





23/42

23

Argument from Sign

Inference says that one thing is a signof another. Its usually used in anargument that something is.

Warrant to this argument is usually in

the form: X is a sign of Y.


24/42

24

Slendertone Argument from Sign Diagrammed

You can see my

abdomen musclesmove in response to

the device.

This exercise device

works to definemuscles.

Muscle movement is a

sign that this exercisedevice works to define

muscles.


25/42

25

Argument from Signhttp://www.rhymeswithorange.com/ 22 March 2005.


26/42

26

Cartoon Argument from Sign Diagrammed

The Shakespearian

actors lost theirBritish accents in the

second act.

This play was not very

good.

Shifting accents are a

sign that a play is notvery good.


27/42

27

CSIargument by sign diagrammed

Her blood contained

human chorionicgonadotropin.

She is definitely with

child.

Human chorionic gonadotropin

is a sign that a woman is with child.


28/42


29/42

29

Argument from Cause

Inference moves from cause to effect oreffect to cause, arguing that somethingis the direct result of something else.

Warrant to this argument is usually in

the form : X causes Y.


30/42


31/42

31

Overheard Argument from Cause Diagrammed

Mothers are working

long hours outsidethe home.

Kids today are more

violent and dangerous.

Mothers working long hours

outside the home cause kidsto become violent and dangerous.


32/42

32

Toyota Argument from Cause Diagrammed

The man drove this

car.

The man now has

higher adrenalinelevels.

Driving this car caused the

man to increase his adrenalinelevels.

T t f A t f


33/42

33

Tests for Argument from

Cause

Does one thing really cause the other,or are they merely correlated?

Is there another larger cause or seriesof causes that better explains theeffect?


34/42

34

Argument from Testimony

Inference reasons that what atrustworthy source says is true

Warrant to this argument usually saysWhen a qualified person says

something is true, it is true.


35/42

35

Slendertone Argument from Testimony Diagrammed

Greta Blackburn, the

founding editor forMiss FitnessMagazine, says so.

The Slendertone ab

belt really stands outas effective.

When a qualified person

says something is true,it is true.


36/42

36

Time to KillArgument from Testimony Diagrammed

Doctor Roadhieber

has diagnosed DanBaker as a paranoidschizophrenic.

Dan Baker is a

paranoid schizophrenic

When a qualified person

says something is true,it is true.

Te t fo A g ment f om


37/42

37


Testimony

Are the source qualified to say what isbeing said? Is she or he in a position toknow this information?

Does the testimony represent what theauthority really meant to say?

Is the source relatively unbiased andrecent?


38/42

38

Argument from Narrative

Inference reasons from the meaning orlesson of a story to a claim.

Warrant to this argument usually saysThe moral to a story tells us a greater

truth.


39/42

39

Argument from Narrative from Chris Bayley, Lets Let

Bartells Run the Department of Licensing,SeattleTimes, 6 April 2005, B7.

After telling the story of how he went to theDOL in South Seattle and found it poorlyorganized and understaffed, and comparing itto the North Seattle DOL his daughter went

to the next day, he argues that all Seattlearea citizens are not being served equallywell, and the state should ensure its DOL

offices are provided adequate resources andsufficient staff, as any customer-friendlybusiness would.


40/42

40

Argument from Narrative Diagrammed

Story of contrasting

DOL experiences.

It is unfair that people

are being treateddifferently in South andNorth Seattle, with the

former getting poorservice from the state.

The moral of a story tellsus a greater truth.



41/42

41


Narrative

Does the moral really follow from thestory?

Is the narrative plausible and coherent?

Are characterizations consistent?


42/42

42

Easily confused argument types

argument by example (reasoning from

general to specific and vice versa)vs.

argument by analogy (reasoning from case to

case) argument from sign (indicating that

something is or is not)

vs.argument from cause (arguing thatsomething caused something else).

Documents

Day 4 Argument Types