Embedded Files
Google document for editing:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U-Xij1SdpXGqA1-3wF3UZ6Q_qWCZsB_4ve6kJRWpyME/edit
Chapter Learning Objectives
Chapter Learning Objectives
Explain the components of a strong argument, including clear claims, relevant evidence, and logical reasoning, to effectively support a thesis in academic writing.
Identify strategies for developing coherent and persuasive arguments, focusing on organization, counterarguments, and evidence evaluation to enhance credibility and persuasiveness.
Apply critical thinking and rhetorical skills to construct and present arguments in various contexts, employing ethical persuasion techniques and addressing diverse audiences with sensitivity to differing viewpoints.
Introduction (Chat GBT to be edited or redone by faculty)
Introduction (Chat GBT to be edited or redone by faculty)
In this chapter, we embark on a comprehensive exploration of developing arguments, a cornerstone of critical thinking and writing that is indispensable for college students. The ability to construct a coherent, persuasive argument is not only fundamental to academic success across disciplines but also vital for effective participation in civic life and professional fields. Through a critical thinking and writing lens, we dissect the intricacies of argument development, from the initial formulation of a thesis to the structuring of evidence and the refinement of claims.
We begin by laying the groundwork with a clear definition of what constitutes an argument in academic and real-world contexts. Students are introduced to the essential components of an argument: claims, evidence, and warrants, and how these elements interconnect to form a persuasive and logical narrative. By understanding these building blocks, students can start to craft their arguments with confidence and clarity.
The chapter then delves into the strategies for developing strong, compelling arguments, emphasizing the importance of critical thinking in evaluating evidence, anticipating counterarguments, and understanding the audience. Through practical exercises and examples, students learn to apply these strategies in their writing, enhancing their ability to argue convincingly and thoughtfully.
Special attention is given to the role of research in argument development. We guide students through the process of finding, analyzing, and integrating sources, highlighting the significance of credibility and relevance in supporting claims. This section reinforces the critical thinking skills necessary for discerning the quality of evidence and the ethical considerations involved in academic writing.
Interactive components, including workshops and peer review sessions, offer students the opportunity to practice developing arguments in a supportive, collaborative environment. Feedback and revision are emphasized as key aspects of the writing process, enabling students to refine their arguments and improve their persuasive power.
By the conclusion of this chapter, students will have gained a robust toolkit for developing arguments that are not only persuasive but also grounded in critical thinking and ethical scholarship. This foundation will serve them well in their academic pursuits, professional careers, and the broader context of civic engagement, where effective argumentation is crucial for advocating positions and enacting change.
Text below is a starting point, we can build on this. Orriginal source:
1.3: Week 3 - The Purpose of Argument (How to Be Wrong)
1.3: Week 3 - The Purpose of Argument (How to Be Wrong)
Mt Hood Community College via MHCC Library Press
Why do we argue with one another? What is the intention? How do we know when we have “won” or “lost” an argument? What happens then? In this unit, we explore the functions and purposes of argument to reveal the deeper reasons we engage in this complex, frequently stressful activity and what we can gain by having an enhanced perspective on it.
Argument is not in itself an end or a purpose of communication. It is rather a means of discourse, a way of developing what we have to say. We can identify four primary aims or purposes that argument helps us accomplish:
Inquiry
Conviction
Persuasion
Negotiation
View the Powerpoint: The Four Aims of Argument
Arguing to Inquire: Forming our opinions or questioning those we already have.
The ancient Greeks used the word dialectic to identify an argument as inquiry; a more common term might be dialogue or conversation. Arguing to inquire helps us accomplish the following:
to form opinions
to question opinions
to reason our way through conflicts or contradictions
It requires an attitude of patient questioning under non-threatening circumstances, usually done alone or among trusted friends and associates. The primary purpose is a search for the truth. The primary audience is often the writer and fellow inquirers concerned with the same issues.
Examples: Classroom discussions; journal writing; exploratory essays; letters; late-night bull sessions in a dorm.
Arguing to Convince: Gaining assent from others through case-making.
While some inquiry may be never-ending, the goal of most inquiry is to reach a conclusion, a conviction. We seek an earned opinion, achieved through careful thought, research, and discussion. And then we usually want others to share this conviction, to secure the assent of an audience by means of reason rather than by force.
Arguing to inquire centers on asking questions: we want to expose and examine what we think.
Arguing to convince requires us to make a case, to get others to agree with what we think. While inquiry is a cooperative use of argument, convincing is competitive. We put our case against the case of others in an effort to win the assent of readers.
Examples: a lawyer’s brief; newspaper editorials; case studies; most academic writing
Arguing to Persuade: Moving others to action through rational, emotional, personal, and stylistic appeals.
While arguing to convince seeks to earn the assent of readers or listeners, arguing to persuade attempts to influence their behavior, to move them to act upon the conviction. Persuasion aims to close the gap between assent and action. To convince focuses on the logic of an argument; to persuade will often rely on the personal appeal of the writer (what Aristotle called ethos) and involve an appeal to an audience’s emotions (pathos). In addition to these personal and emotional appeals, persuasion exploits the resources of language more fully than convincing does.
In general, the more academic the audience or the more purely intellectual the issue, the more likely that the writing task involves an argument to convince rather than to persuade. In most philosophy or science assignments, for example, the writer would usually focus on conviction rather than persuasion, confining the argument primarily to thesis, reasons, and evidence. But when you are working with public issues, with matters of policy or questions of right and wrong, persuasion’s fuller range of appeal is usually appropriate.
Persuasion begins with difference and, when it works, ends with identity. We expect that before reading our argument, readers will differ from us in beliefs, attitudes, and/or desires. A successful persuasive argument brings readers and writer together, creating a sense of connection between parties.
Examples: Political speeches, sermons, advertising
Arguing to Negotiate: Exploring differences of opinion in the hope of reaching agreement and/or cooperation.
If efforts to convince and/or persuade the audience have failed, the participants must often turn to negotiation, resolving the conflict in order to maintain a satisfactory working relationship.
Each side must listen closely to understand the other side’s case and the emotional commitments and values that support that case. The aim of negotiation is to build consensus, usually by making and asking for concessions. Dialogue plays a key role, bringing us full circle back to argument as inquiry. Negotiation often depends on collaborative problem-solving.
Examples: Diplomatic negotiations, labor relations, documents in organizational decision-making; essays seeking resolution of conflict between competing parties; also frequent in private life when dealing with disagreements among friends and family members.
The Importance of Being Wrong
The Importance of Being Wrong
In this module, you are reading articles and watching videos that explore the science and logic of why we argue and why being wrong is not something we should try to avoid at all costs or view as “losing.” Collaboration and clarification of ideas are the highest pursuits of argumentative communication and when we are proven wrong, we are given the opportunity to learn, to grow and to enhance our understanding of the complex and vibrant world we inhabit.
View the video: For Argument’s Sake, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTN9Nx8VYtk&feature=youtu.be
View the video: On Being Wrong, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QleRgTBMX88&feature=youtu.be
Both of these talks (above) address the dangers of being too close to our own ideas. They offer examples and insights that show what can go wrong when we would rather “feel” right than “be” right. They also address the opportunities that open up to us when we allow ourselves to be detached enough from our ideas to create the space for growth, doubt, investigation and eventually increased understanding and awareness. When we believe we are right about everything all of the time, we miss the opportunities to learn from one another and from each new perspective we encounter. The following articles address the scientific basis for what embracing being “wrong” can actually offer our individual and collective ways of knowing.
This page titled 1.3: Week 3 - The Purpose of Argument (How to Be Wrong) is shared under a CC BY license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Andrew Gurevich (MHCC Library Press) .
1.8: Week 8 - Toulmin Analysis (Claims and Data)
1.8: Week 8 - Toulmin Analysis (Claims and Data)
This unit explores the method of argument analysis developed by the British logician Stephen Toulmin. The method analyzes arguments by exploring their underlying assumptions. This week we will address:
Claim (The main point)
Data (The evidence)
View the short video Toulmin Analysis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-YP...ature=youtu.be
View the Powerpoint Presentation: Toulmin Model
Review the document: ToulminExplained
Review the document: Toulmin Analysis Questions
Stephen Toulmin
Stephen Toulmin
Stephen Toulmin was a British philosopher, author, and educator. Influenced by Ludwig Wittgenstein, Toulmin devoted his works to the analysis of moral reasoning. Throughout his writings, he sought to develop practical arguments which can be used effectively in evaluating the ethics behind moral issues. His works were later found useful in the field of rhetoric for analyzing rhetorical arguments. The Toulmin Model of Argumentation, a diagram containing six interrelated components used for analyzing arguments, was considered his most influential work, particularly in the field of rhetoric and communication, and in computer science.
The Toulmin Model
The Toulmin Model
Claim: the position or claim being argued for; the conclusion of the argument.
Data/Grounds: reasons or supporting evidence that bolster the claim.
Warrant: the principle, provision or chain of reasoning that connects the grounds/reason to the claim.
Backing: support, justification, reasons to back up the warrant.
Rebuttal/Reservation: exceptions to the claim; description and rebuttal of counter-examples and counter-arguments.
Qualification: specification of limits to claim, warrant and backing. The degree of conditionality asserted.
For this week, we will mostly be addressing claims and data.
When looking for the claim, ask yourself the question: “What is the main idea of central claim of this argument?”
When looking for the data/grounds, ask yourself the question, “What are the reasons given to support the claim?”
When looking for the warrant, ask yourself the question, “Why does the arguer believe this data proves this claim?”
Claims
Claims
There are FOUR types of claims:
Claims of Fact
Claims of Value
Claims of Policy
Claims of Definition
This week, we will be exploring the use of the Toulmin Model of Argumentation both in the analysis and creation of arguments. You will apply what you learn to your final essay (due the final week of class).
This page titled 1.8: Week 8 - Toulmin Analysis (Claims and Data) is shared under a CC BY license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Andrew Gurevich (MHCC Library Press) .
1.9: Week 9 - Toulmin Analysis (Warrants)
1.9: Week 9 - Toulmin Analysis (Warrants)
Mt Hood Community College via MHCC Library Press
This unit explores the method of argument analysis developed by the British logician Stephen Toulmin. The method analyzes arguments by exploring their underlying assumptions This week we will address:
Warrant (The unspoken, underlying assumption that connects the claim to the data).
Warrants/General Strategies of Argument
Warrants/General Strategies of Argument
Warrants are chains of reasoning that connect the claim and evidence/reason. A warrant is the principle, provision or chain of reasoning that connects the grounds/reason to the claim. Warrants operate at a higher level of generality than a claim or reason, and they are not normally explicit.
Example: “Needle exchange programs should be abolished [claim] because they only cause more people to use drugs [reason/data].” The unstated warrant is: “when you make risky behavior safer you encourage more people to engage in it.”
Example: “We should outlaw same-sex marriage [claim] becausethe Bible says it is morally wrong [reason/data].” The unstated warrant is: “we should base laws on what the Bible says.”
If the audience/readers share the warrant (the unstated assumption that connects the data to the claim) they will likely find the argument valid. If they do not, they will likely not. There are THREE types of warrants:
Substantive Warrants (based in Logos)
Authoritative Warrants (based in Ethos)
Motivational Warrants (based in Pathos)
View the Video: Understanding WarrantsOpens in a new window https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BMn...ature=youtu.be
View the Video: Assumptions & WarrantsOpens in a new window https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oizr...ature=youtu.be
View the Handout: Toulmin WorksheetOpens in a new window (use it to help diagram and analyze the elements of the argument presented in the article you have chosen for your final essay assignment.)
This page titled 1.9: Week 9 - Toulmin Analysis (Warrants) is shared under a CC BY license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Andrew Gurevich (MHCC Library Press) .
End of Chapter Summary
End of Chapter Summary
End of Chapter Discussion Questions
End of Chapter Discussion Questions
This text is a remixed OER licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share and Share a like 4.0 International License unless otherwise stated . https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.en
link to current oer resource here!
Developing Arguments
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse