Toulmin Model of Reasoning

Data(Evidence)

Warrant(Reasoning)

Claim(Conclusion)

Rebuttal(Reservation)

Qualifier(Probability)

Backing(Clarification)

FIP Argument

Claim: Remo contracted FIP at the

vet’s.

Data: Remo stayed at the

vet’s with kidney failure

& soon returned to die of FIP.

Warrant: A cat with a low

immune system can contract FIP.

Rebuttal: Unless the virus was latent.

Backing: Immune systems protect from disease.

Qualifier: Possibly.

What’s happening here?

Line Drawing Argument

Claim: The couple is drinking coffee.

Data: We see two cups on the table between

the two people.

Warrant: We drink coffee out of cups in the

U.S.

Rebuttal: Unless this is in England.

Backing: Our experience with

coffee is common.

Qualifier: Probably.

Burglary Argument

Claim: John is guilt of burglary.

Data: Police officers saw John leave a

house carrying a VCR which was not his.

Warrant: Burglary means taking another’s

property w/intent.

Rebuttal: Unless he can- not understand his actions.

Backing: The law specifically defines

responsibility.

Qualifier: Beyond doubt.

Highway Argument

Claim: We should build such a 3-lane

highway .

Data: A three-lane highway

between Hemet and Temecula

would be safer.

Warrant: We want to be safe.

Rebuttal: Unless we can achieve safety in other ways.

Backing: We spend a lot on safety.

Qualifier: Definitely.

Exercise C1

Claim: A national health

care plan is vital.

Data: Many Americans

cannot afford adequate health

care.

Warrant: When citizens cannot afford a vital service, the

government must assist them.

Exercise C3

Claim: The canyon area ought to be developed.

Data: More people would have access to [that canyon

area].

Warrant: What benefits more people is what should be done

[implied].