Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Argumentation
Participating in Academic Discourse
Intro to Argument
Argument Survey
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
From
Everythings an Argument
All language has an argumentative edge
that aims to make a point. From bumper
stickers, to signage, to the statement This
wont hurt a bit, visual and verbal messages all
contain arguments. Some argue that every text
is an argument, designed to influence readers.
Its important to realize that argument isnt just
about winning, it can also be about informing,
convincing, exploring, and making decisions.
5
From
Everythings an Argument
There is a distinction between argument and
persuasion. The point of argument is to discover
some version of the truth, using evidence. Argument
leads audiences towards conviction, an understanding
that the claim is reasonable. The point of persuasion
is to change a point of view in order to move others
from conviction to action. In other words, writers or
speakers argue to find truth, and persuade others
when they think they already know a truth.
Argument (discover a truth) -> conviction
Persuasion (know a truth) -> action
Argumentation continuum
FORMAL
ARGUMENT
To explain/defend a
credible conclusion to
a generalaudience
basedon synthesisof
multiple perspectives
Clearly stated
assertions/pre
mises
Definiti on
Logical appealsonly
Fair consideration of
multiple perspectives
ELEMENTS
Purposeand
Audience
Content
PERSUASION
To convince a
specif ic audienceto
accept an op
inionthesis (reject an
antithesis)or take
action
Assertionsoften
implied
Connotati on
Balance of appeals
Direct refutation of
opposing positions7
FORMAL
ARGUMENT
Establishes relevance
of
proposition/conclusion
Linear organization
based on reasoning or
development method
Formal diction/word
choice
Objective tone (attempt
to appear as unbiased
as possible)
Summary of
premises/conclusion
ELEMENTS
Organization
Style
Conclusion
PERSUASION
Hooks reader into a
clearly stated
position
Builds in emotional
intensity to a high
point
Level of diction
relative to
audience/purpose
Subjective tone
(persuasive but not
antagonistic)
Call to action
Types of Appeals
Logical Appeal (Logos): An appeal based on logic that
presents reasons for an opinion or conclusion and
evidence to support them. (Appeal to the HEAD)
Emotional Appeal (Pathos): appeals to the feelings of
readers to drive them to action. (Appeal to the HEART)
Ethical Appeal (Ethos): reflects the image you as the
writer projects to the audience to gain their support; asks
the audience to trust or believe you based on the
transparency of your actions. (Appeal to the GUT)
9
13
5.
14
15
Common Fallacies
There are many logical fallacies, but here are the twelve
you will need to know!
Hasty generalization: The writer bases his/her argument
on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence.
Non sequitur: Means it doesnt follow; the writers
conclusion is not necessarily a logical result of the facts.
Begging the question: The writer presents as truth what is
supposed to be proven by the argument.
Red herring: The writer introduces an irrelevant point to
divert the readers attention from the main issue.
16
Common Fallacies
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc: Means after this, therefore
because of this; writer assumes that because one event
follows another in time, the first event caused the second.
Ad hominem: Means to the man; the writer attacks the
opponents character rather than the argument.
Ad populum: Means to the people; the writer evades the
issues by appealing to readers emotional reactions to
certain subjects.
Circular reasoning: The writer uses statements that
restate what is already implied; the evidence being used
is actually a restatement of the problem.
17
Common Fallacies
Card stacking: Using only evidence to support one
opinion or side and ignoring other perspectives.
Quick Fix: The writer relies on catchy phrases or slogans
that may not hold up under cross- examination.
Either/Or: The writer tries to convince the readers that
there are only two sides to an issueone right and one
wrong.
Faulty use of authority: The writer relies on testimony
from an expert speaking about something that is not from
his/her field of expertise.
18
Methods of Arguing
Adapted from Weston, Anthony. A Rulebook for Arguments. 3rd ed. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 2000.
Methods of Arguing
By Example: offer examples to support
generalizations
Use multiple, representative examples
Provide background information
Test using counterexamples
Common rhetorical strategies: narration,
description, illustration, definition
Common fallacies: card stacking, begging the
question, circular thinking
20
Methods of Arguing
By Analogy: use an extended comparison
emphasizing points of similarity
Pick analogous example based on points of
similarity
Insure analogy is relevant to conclusions
Common rhetorical strategies: comparison/contrast,
classification/division
Common fallacies: faulty analogy, non sequitur,
either/or
21
Methods of Arguing
By Authority: incorporate information from
sources to support conclusions
Cite sources completely and correctly.
Seek informed, credible, impartial sources.
Verify information from sources.
Common rhetorical strategies: illustration, definition
Common fallacies: faulty use of authority, ad
hominem, red herring
22
Methods of Arguing
By Causes: look for causal relationships in
correlations
Explain how cause leads to effect; identify direction
of causality
Propose most likely cause; recognize causes may be
complex
Recognize correlated events may be coincidental or
have common causes
Common rhetorical strategies: process analysis,
causal analysis
Common fallacies: post hoc, non sequitur
23
Methods of Arguing
By Deduction: derive conclusions from
relevant generalizations/premises
Verify that individual premises are true
Verify that form is logical and valid
Common rhetorical strategies: illustration, definition
Common fallacies: non sequitur, begging the
question, circular reasoning
24
Propaganda Methods
1. Bandwagon: Everyone else is doing it/believing
it/thinking it, so you should, too!
Common fallacy:ad populum
2. Testimonial: Using people (often famous) to endorse
a product or idea to show why it is the best choice.
Common fallacy: faulty use of authority
3. Loaded Language: Using specific language that taps
into particular human feelings.
1. Common fallacies: quick fix, red herring
26
Propaganda Methods
4. Glittering generalities: Using non-specific
superlatives to make a product or idea seem
particularly special.
Common fallacies: quick fix, hasty generalization
5. Name calling: Pegging or pigeonholing people or
ideas using names or stereotypes.
Common fallacy: ad hominem
6. Association: Connecting an idea with a particular
group of people/attitude (plain folks or snob appeal)
Common fallacies: begging the question, ad populum
27
A Question of Values
VALUES are what we hold to be important. These
are based on our MORALS, beliefs we use to
identify good and bad and distinguish between
right and wrong. ETHICS is the process by which
we apply our values to make CHOICES when
values come into CONFLICT. It is not a question
of legality or morality, but the careful
consideration of options based on what we hold to
be important.
28
29
30