argumentation what is it and what are its parts?

ArgumentationArgumentation

What is it and What is it and

what are its parts?what are its parts?

Argumentation:Argumentation: What is it? What is it?

• It is a reasoned, logical way of It is a reasoned, logical way of asserting the soundness of a asserting the soundness of a position, belief, or conclusion.position, belief, or conclusion.

• It takes a stand—supported by It takes a stand—supported by evidence—and urges people to evidence—and urges people to share the writer’s perspective and share the writer’s perspective and insights.insights.

Argumentation: PurposesArgumentation: Purposes

1.1. To convince other people to accept—or To convince other people to accept—or at least accept the validity of—your at least accept the validity of—your positionposition

2.2. To defend your position, even if others To defend your position, even if others cannot be convinced to agreecannot be convinced to agree

3.3. To question or refute a position you To question or refute a position you believe to be misguided, untrue, or believe to be misguided, untrue, or dangerous without necessarily offering dangerous without necessarily offering an alternativean alternative

Purposes ContinuedPurposes Continued

To achieve these purposes, To achieve these purposes, argumentation has a formal argumentation has a formal

structure which evolves structure which evolves according to a writer’s according to a writer’s

interpretation and interpretation and presentation of evidence.presentation of evidence.

Elements of an Elements of an argumentative essayargumentative essay

1.1. EvidenceEvidence

2.2. AppealsAppeals

3.3. Nods to and refutation of the Nods to and refutation of the oppositionopposition

4.4. A clear sense of purposeA clear sense of purpose

5.5. A clear thesis or claimA clear thesis or claim

6.6. A clear sense of audienceA clear sense of audience

Evidence is evaluated in Evidence is evaluated in terms of four criteria:terms of four criteria:

1.1. Relevance: evidence should support Relevance: evidence should support the essay’s thesis or claim and be the essay’s thesis or claim and be pertinent to the argument being made.pertinent to the argument being made.– Example: in an essay supporting mandatory Example: in an essay supporting mandatory

HIV testing for all health care workers, one HIV testing for all health care workers, one writer made the point that the spread of writer made the point that the spread of AIDS is at epidemic proportions. To AIDS is at epidemic proportions. To illustrate the point the point, the writer illustrate the point the point, the writer provided a discussion of the bubonic plague provided a discussion of the bubonic plague in 14th century Europe. Why might that be in 14th century Europe. Why might that be a problem?a problem?

Evidence and the Four Evidence and the Four Criteria ContinuedCriteria Continued

2.2. Representative or Typicality: evidence should Representative or Typicality: evidence should represent the full range of opinions about represent the full range of opinions about the subject and not just one side or the other. the subject and not just one side or the other. You want a balanced and convincing You want a balanced and convincing discussion. In addition, the examples and discussion. In addition, the examples and expert opinions you include should be typical expert opinions you include should be typical rather than aberrantrather than aberrant

• If you argued against the use of animals in medical If you argued against the use of animals in medical experimentation, you would not use just the experimentation, you would not use just the information provided by animal rights activists. information provided by animal rights activists. Why?Why?


3.3. Sufficient: there should be enough Sufficient: there should be enough evidence to support the claim(s). The evidence to support the claim(s). The amount of evidence required depends amount of evidence required depends upon the length of your paper, your upon the length of your paper, your audience, and the nature of your audience, and the nature of your thesis. thesis.

• Why would an author arguing for the Why would an author arguing for the validity of alien abduction stories require validity of alien abduction stories require more evidence than one arguing against more evidence than one arguing against their validity? their validity?


4.4. Accuracy: Data shouldn’t be used Accuracy: Data shouldn’t be used unless it is accurate and up-to-unless it is accurate and up-to-date, and it can’t be persuasive date, and it can’t be persuasive unless the audience believes in unless the audience believes in the writer’s credibility. Faith in the writer’s credibility. Faith in the accuracy of a writer’s data is the accuracy of a writer’s data is one function of one function of ethosethos..

Evidence: Different KindsEvidence: Different Kinds

• FactualFactual (Chester A. Arthur was the 21 (Chester A. Arthur was the 21stst president): The most commonly used president): The most commonly used type of evidence; may be drawn from type of evidence; may be drawn from your own experience but primarily your own experience but primarily drawn from research and reading. Facts drawn from research and reading. Facts are more convincing when are more convincing when supplemented by opinions, or supplemented by opinions, or interpretations of facts. interpretations of facts.


• AuthoritativeAuthoritative (expert testimony): Not all (expert testimony): Not all opinions are equal. The opinions of opinions are equal. The opinions of experts are more convincing that are experts are more convincing that are those of individuals with no specialized those of individuals with no specialized knowledge. In the end, what is knowledge. In the end, what is important is not just the quality of important is not just the quality of evidence but also the credibility of the evidence but also the credibility of the person offering it. person offering it.


• Personal/anecdotalPersonal/anecdotal (calling (calling upon your first-hand upon your first-hand experience), experience), “Volunteering at the battered women’s shelter, “Volunteering at the battered women’s shelter, I was constantly reminded of the emotional and I was constantly reminded of the emotional and psychological devastation wrought by spousal psychological devastation wrought by spousal abuse on the most innocent of victims: the abuse on the most innocent of victims: the children. In this time of slash-and-burn budget children. In this time of slash-and-burn budget cuts, we must protect the social programs that cuts, we must protect the social programs that protect our youngest and most vulnerable protect our youngest and most vulnerable citizens. ” citizens. ”


• StatisticalStatistical (graphs, surveys) (graphs, surveys)

““A 2001 survey by Nielsen Media Research found that 71 A 2001 survey by Nielsen Media Research found that 71 percent of the top 10 programs in 60 countries were percent of the top 10 programs in 60 countries were locally produced in 2001, representing a steady increase locally produced in 2001, representing a steady increase over previous years. American movies on television still over previous years. American movies on television still drew big ratings, grabbing 9 percent of the top 10 slots, drew big ratings, grabbing 9 percent of the top 10 slots, but American dramatic or comedic series typically rated but American dramatic or comedic series typically rated much lower than local shows.” much lower than local shows.”

Work Cited Work Cited Kapner, Suzanne. “U. S. TV Shows Losing Potency Kapner, Suzanne. “U. S. TV Shows Losing Potency Around the World.” Around the World.” NY Times on the WebNY Times on the Web 2 Jan. 2 Jan. 2003. 2003. 2 Jan. 2003 http://www.nytimes.com/2003/ 2 Jan. 2003 http://www.nytimes.com/2003/ 01/02/business/businessspecial/02TUBE.html.01/02/business/businessspecial/02TUBE.html.


• Logical AppealsLogical Appeals (using inductive or (using inductive or deductive reasoning, or Toulmin logic) deductive reasoning, or Toulmin logic) – All books from the RU bookstore are used.All books from the RU bookstore are used.– These books are from RU bookstore.These books are from RU bookstore.– Therefore, these books are used. Therefore, these books are used.

• Emotional AppealsEmotional Appeals (appealing to (appealing to readers’ feelings)readers’ feelings)

• Social/Ethical AppealsSocial/Ethical Appeals (appealing to (appealing to readers’ sense of right and wrong)readers’ sense of right and wrong)

2.0 The Three Levels of 2.0 The Three Levels of Appeal Appeal

1.1. LogicalLogical: an appeal to the reader’s : an appeal to the reader’s mind and sense of reason. This is mind and sense of reason. This is the most heavily used appeal in the most heavily used appeal in argumentative essays. We want argumentative essays. We want our readers to trust our opinions our readers to trust our opinions because they trust not only our because they trust not only our evidence but our interpretations of evidence but our interpretations of it. it.

More on the Three Levels More on the Three Levels of Appealof Appeal

2.2. EmotionalEmotional: an appeal to the reader’s : an appeal to the reader’s emotions. Use this type of appeal most emotions. Use this type of appeal most sparingly and be especially careful to avoid sparingly and be especially careful to avoid using an unfair appeal. When writers employ using an unfair appeal. When writers employ inappropriate emotional appeals—to prejudice inappropriate emotional appeals—to prejudice or fear for example—to influence readers, or fear for example—to influence readers, they destroy their own credibility and they destroy their own credibility and authority. authority.

3.3. Social/EthicalSocial/Ethical: an appeal to the reader’s sense : an appeal to the reader’s sense of right and wrong. We want our readers to of right and wrong. We want our readers to view us as good, trustworthy people; view us as good, trustworthy people; therefore it is important that we establish a therefore it is important that we establish a shared sense of ethics and we establish our shared sense of ethics and we establish our credibility.credibility.

Beware the Inappropriate Beware the Inappropriate AppealAppeal

Again, of the three, the emotional appeal is the Again, of the three, the emotional appeal is the most dangerous and should be used the most most dangerous and should be used the most sparingly. Why? Because writers with little sparingly. Why? Because writers with little concrete support for their claims often resort to concrete support for their claims often resort to manipulating readers with fear tactics or to manipulating readers with fear tactics or to exploiting readers’ insecurities. Skeptical exploiting readers’ insecurities. Skeptical readers—your college-level audience—will readers—your college-level audience—will always be alert to such manipulation. An always be alert to such manipulation. An inappropriate appeal always renders your inappropriate appeal always renders your argument ineffective because it makes readers argument ineffective because it makes readers question your credibility and your ethics. question your credibility and your ethics.

Appeals continuedAppeals continued

Though argumentation Though argumentation emphasizes logical appeal and emphasizes logical appeal and rational reasoning, that does rational reasoning, that does

not mean that it cannot involve not mean that it cannot involve the other levels of appeal. the other levels of appeal.

3.0 Nods to the opposition3.0 Nods to the opposition

• A rhetorical strategy whereby A rhetorical strategy whereby a a writer acknowledges the points of writer acknowledges the points of view of those that do not agree view of those that do not agree with him or her in order to refute with him or her in order to refute (disprove) that position. (disprove) that position.

4.0 Sense of Purpose 4.0 Sense of Purpose

• This boils down to two all important This boils down to two all important questions: questions: 1.1. What do you want to accomplish in your What do you want to accomplish in your

essay? Do you want to correct a essay? Do you want to correct a misconception or straighten a record? Do misconception or straighten a record? Do you want to prove or disprove a particular you want to prove or disprove a particular point of view? point of view?

2.2. What do you want readers to do when What do you want readers to do when they’ve finished reading your piece?they’ve finished reading your piece?

5.0 Strong claim5.0 Strong claim

• Argumentative writing takes a Argumentative writing takes a stand; it requires that the writer stand; it requires that the writer stick his/her neck out and make a stick his/her neck out and make a claim. This claim comes in the claim. This claim comes in the essay as a strong thesisessay as a strong thesis

6.0 Clear Sense of 6.0 Clear Sense of AudienceAudience

In argumentative writing, it is best to In argumentative writing, it is best to assume that you are writing for an assume that you are writing for an educated, skeptically neutral educated, skeptically neutral audience. They may not be hostile audience. They may not be hostile to your claim(s), but they need to to your claim(s), but they need to be convinced. be convinced.


Effective argumentation depends Effective argumentation depends upon having a clear sense of upon having a clear sense of audience. Who a writer is audience. Who a writer is attempting to convince controls the attempting to convince controls the types of evidence selected and the types of evidence selected and the form of argument. form of argument.


You must accommodate the views of You must accommodate the views of your audience even if you are your audience even if you are arguing with those views. Nobody arguing with those views. Nobody wants to be lectured to or to be wants to be lectured to or to be told that he or she is a bad person told that he or she is a bad person for having certain views, beliefs. for having certain views, beliefs.

Statements that may sound Statements that may sound reasonable or true but are reasonable or true but are

deceptive and dishonest. The deceptive and dishonest. The most common aremost common are

Other Things to Consider: Other Things to Consider: FallaciesFallacies

Fallacies: Examples Fallacies: Examples ContinuedContinued

• Begging the question: assumes in the Begging the question: assumes in the premise what the arguer should be premise what the arguer should be trying to prove. This tactic asks readers trying to prove. This tactic asks readers to agree that certain points are self-to agree that certain points are self-evident when they are not. Ex.: “The evident when they are not. Ex.: “The unfair and shortsighted legislation that unfair and shortsighted legislation that limits free-trade is clearly a threat to the limits free-trade is clearly a threat to the American economy”American economy”

More on FallaciesMore on Fallacies

• False analogy: Asks readers to assume False analogy: Asks readers to assume two things are comparable when they, in two things are comparable when they, in fact, are not.fact, are not.– Ex: The overcrowded conditions in some Ex: The overcrowded conditions in some

parts of our city have forced people together parts of our city have forced people together like rats in a cage. Like rats, they will like rats in a cage. Like rats, they will eventually turn on one another, fighting and eventually turn on one another, fighting and killing until a balance is restored. killing until a balance is restored.

No evidence is offered that people behave like No evidence is offered that people behave like rats under these or any other conditions.rats under these or any other conditions.

More FallaciesMore Fallacies

• Personal Attack: Tries to divert Personal Attack: Tries to divert attention from the facts of an argument attention from the facts of an argument by attacking the motives or character of by attacking the motives or character of the person making the argument. the person making the argument. – Ex. The public should not take seriously Dr. Ex. The public should not take seriously Dr.

Mason’s plan for upgrading county health Mason’s plan for upgrading county health services. He is a recovering alcoholic and services. He is a recovering alcoholic and his second wife just left him.his second wife just left him.

Fallacies Cont.Fallacies Cont.

• Hasty or Sweeping Generalization: when a Hasty or Sweeping Generalization: when a conclusion is based on too little evidence.conclusion is based on too little evidence.– Our daughter Maggy really benefited from nursery Our daughter Maggy really benefited from nursery

school; every child should go.school; every child should go.

• Either/Or Fallacy: Assumes only two Either/Or Fallacy: Assumes only two alternatives exist thought there may be othersalternatives exist thought there may be others– We must choose between life or death, between We must choose between life or death, between

intervention and genocide. There can be no neutral intervention and genocide. There can be no neutral position. position.

Still MoreStill More

• Red Herring: When the focus of an argument is Red Herring: When the focus of an argument is changed to divert the audience from the actual changed to divert the audience from the actual issueissue– Ex.Ex. The mayor has proposed building a new The mayor has proposed building a new

baseball-only sports stadium. How can he even baseball-only sports stadium. How can he even consider allocating millions to this irresponsible consider allocating millions to this irresponsible scheme when so many professional baseball players scheme when so many professional baseball players have drug problems?have drug problems?

• Appeal to Doubtful Authority: Citing people who Appeal to Doubtful Authority: Citing people who may have name recognition but no authority may have name recognition but no authority on an issue.on an issue.– Ex. Ex. According to the late Joey Ramone, interest rates According to the late Joey Ramone, interest rates

will remain low during the next fiscal year. will remain low during the next fiscal year.


• Misleading statistics: a Misleading statistics: a misrepresentation or distortion of misrepresentation or distortion of statistics.statistics.– Ex. Ex. Women will never be competent Women will never be competent

firefighters; after all, 50% of the women in firefighters; after all, 50% of the women in the city’s training program failed the exam. the city’s training program failed the exam.

– The writer has neglected to mention that The writer has neglected to mention that there were only two women in the program. there were only two women in the program. Because this stats is not based on a large Because this stats is not based on a large enough sample, iti s unreliableenough sample, iti s unreliable


• Post hoc reasoningPost hoc reasoning• Non sequiturNon sequitur


• See Michael Fumento’s Article for See Michael Fumento’s Article for an example of an argumentative an example of an argumentative essay directed at debunking bad essay directed at debunking bad science, science, http://http://www.fumento.com/outlooksci.htmlwww.fumento.com/outlooksci.html

Another Point to COnsider: Another Point to COnsider: Documentation Documentation

• All points in your paper must be supported and all of All points in your paper must be supported and all of your evidence must be documented. If you don’t your evidence must be documented. If you don’t document your sour sources your readers are likely to document your sour sources your readers are likely to dismiss your evidence as inaccurate, unreliable, or false. dismiss your evidence as inaccurate, unreliable, or false. Documentation gives readers the ability to judge the Documentation gives readers the ability to judge the sources you cite and to consult them if they wish. When sources you cite and to consult them if they wish. When you document your sources you are telling readers that you document your sources you are telling readers that your are honest and have nothing to hide.your are honest and have nothing to hide.

• You don’t have to document every idea in your paper. You don’t have to document every idea in your paper. Common knowledge can be presented without Common knowledge can be presented without documentation. The trick is figuring out what is common documentation. The trick is figuring out what is common knowledge. knowledge.

argumentation what is it and what are its parts?

Documents

presentation of evidence

alternative slide

used type of evidence

validity ofyour position

writers data

writers perspective

writers interpretation

writers credibility