Yes-No-Why “This action, which some are calling an uprising, was

not about the details of one shooting; it spoke to the overwhelming frustration that people are living through day after day.”

Abby Ohlheiser, March 12, 2013

Write an academic sentence that follows this structure: “I agree with the assertion because…” OR “I disagree with this assertion because…” Share.

We agree: There is a significant problem with the way “we”

perceive and interact with each other.

There is a “system that plays unequally” (Smith, 2000).

Perceived threats (whether physical, social, or economical) stimulate extreme biases, which often lead to aggression (Fiske, 2008). Examples include:

Rodney King and the 1992 Los Angeles riots

The 2012 shooting of teenager Trayvon Martin

The March 9, 2013 shooting of teenager Kimani Gray

We know: How do we reduce bias?

Create “constructive intergroup contact that increases mutual appreciation” (Fiske, 2002).

“equal status within the immediate setting”

“shared goals”

“cooperation in pursuit of those goals”

“authorities’ support” (Fiske, 2002)

Let’s do it! First, we must decide on our “shared goals”:

What do we want to see changed?

What causes are worth our collective time and effort?

What can we realistically take on?

Who/what most needs our help?

THIS WEEK: learn academic argumentation skills and structure so you can be more persuasive

“You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

-- Inigo Montoya in The Princess Bride

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAEBgDZVLfU

An academic argument is NOT: a statement of fact (and is this really a fact?)

26.7% of Australians prefer dark chocolate.

an assertion or claim Wearing a seatbelt reduces the risk of injury.

a prescriptive statement The Government should spend more money on

healthcare.

a conditional statement If you drink too much, you will damage your brain.

a series of statements about the same thing.

Source: Flinders University

An academic argument IS: A claim that is justified.

So, what is a claim? Conflicting definitions, but here goes:

A claim defines your paper’s goals, direction, and scope

A claim must be argumentative. When you make a claim, you are arguing for a certain interpretation or understanding of your subject.

A good claim is specific. It makes a focused argument (MTV‟s popularity is waning because it no longer plays music videos) rather than a general one (MTV sucks).

An academic argument is thoroughly developed with support for the claim. (more on this later)

You may have just one or multiple arguments in a persuasive paper.

Descriptive thesis statements vs. arguable claims Following are examples of descriptive thesis statements students write

in high school. Each is drawn from the top-scoring AP English Language and Composition papers posted on the College Board website: “To be a writer, one must have an elite understanding of diction, syntax and

tone. These literary devices are utilized by writers, including Eudora Welty, as a method for expressing the message that they wish to convey to readers.”

“In the excerpt from One Writer’s Beginnings, Eudora Welty conveys a positive

tone toward her childhood experience. She accomplishes this through the use of descriptive diction, impressionable images, and unusual syntax.”

“The two passages given describe the swamp in very different lights. Although

they are in some ways familiar, the styles of the authors of these paragraphs are very different.”

Descriptive thesis statements vs. arguable claims These are NOT argumentative claims because the writers’ strategy here is to create a thesis statement that is DESCRIPTIVE.

The writer is describing some aspect of the main text, and that’s all s/he is doing. It’s like saying, “Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet is a play about two star crossed lovers and two warring families.”

Descriptive theses do not investigate anything, critique anything, or analyze anything.

Descriptive claims also do not invite support and argument from outside of the central text nor do descriptive papers apply what has been learned in the central text to other texts.

Opinion vs. arguable claim Opinion:

Twinkies are delicious. I like dance music. I think Virginia Woolf is better than James Joyce. The governor is a bad man.

Arguable claim:

Twinkies taste better than other snack cakes because of their texture, their creamy filling, and their golden appearance.

Dance music has become popular for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the music; rather, the clear, fast beats respond to the need of people on amphetamines to move, and to move quickly.

Virginia Woolf is a more effective writer than James Joyce because she does not rely on elaborate language devices that ultimately confuse and alienate the reader.

The governor has continually done the community a disservice by mishandling money, focusing on frivolous causes, and failing to listen to his constituents.

Opinion vs. arguable claim What are the differences?

An argument is supported by evidence, which can be debated/challenged.

Opinion is supported by more opinion (and ultimately you end up with something along the lines of “Well, just because, okay?”).

A claim can be substantiated with research, evidence, testimony, and academic reasoning.

A claim is something more than statement and support: an arguable claim also goes on to address the “so what?” question, the implications and why we should care in the first place.

Remember that not all claims are created equal, and though a claim may be arguable, the best claims are focused, specific, complex, and relevant.

Supporting claims To make a claim arguable, it must have support.

Support

Grounds

Data All the same idea: evidence that shows the claim makes sense.

The rules of academic argument exclude the following as support: Because it is my personal opinion

Because my friends or relatives think so or most people think so

Because it’s always been, it’s tradition

Because it’s obvious

Because it’s morally right

Supporting claims Warrant

Reasoning that links the support/grounds/data to the claim

Claim:

People should not keep birds as pets.

Grounds:

In captivity, birds do not survive very long.

Warrant:

We should not interfere with an animal’s quality of life.

The claim and grounds together make the claim arguable: “Because they do not survive long in captivity, people should not keep birds as pets.”

Breathe. Check in with yourself.

Academic argumentation: let’s review: An argument is…

An extended series of evidence that supports a claim.

A claim is… A statement of opinion.

An arguable claim is different because it… Also includes some evidence.

The difference between a descriptive claim and an arguable claim is that… An arguable claim invites support and argument from multiple outside sources where a

descriptive claim does not. Also, an arguable claim is a belief that reasonable people could disagree on whereas a descriptive claim will be much more readily accepted.

Three words that all mean “evidence” for a claim are… Support, grounds, and data.

A warrant is… Reasoning that links the support/grounds/data to the claim

More about arguable claims Definition: A claim states your position on the issue you have chosen to write about. A good claim is not obvious. Why bother proving a point nobody could

disagree with? A good claim is engaging. Consider your audience's attention span and make

interesting claims which point out new ideas: teach the reader something new. A good claim is not overly vague. Attacking enormous issues whole leads only

to generalizations and vague assertions; refrain from making a book-size claim. A good claim is logical; it emerges from a reasonable consideration of evidence.

(Note: this does not mean that evidence has only one logical interpretation. Reasonable people often disagree.)

A good claim is debatable. Claims that are purely factual and claims that are

only opinion fail this requirement.

More about arguable claims Exercise: Which of the following sentences make(s) an arguable claim? ______________________is/is not an arguable claim because… Polls show that today more minorities own businesses than ever before.

We must strive with every ounce of our national vigor to ensure that America

has a bright future and that truth and justice will abide with us forever. Teachers are posed with many problems today. Though they seem mere entertainment, Hollywood movies are actually

responsible for reinforcing cultural stereotypes in America. Ophelia is my favorite character in Hamlet because she is the most interesting. If we can put humans on the moon, we can find a cure for the common cold.

Support-grounds-data=evidence Definition: the evidence which you cite to support your claim. Like a lawyer presenting evidence to a jury, you must support your claim with facts; an unsupported claim is merely an assertion. There are four major categories of evidence: “Factual” or Statistical Evidence: objectively determined data about your topic. (Note:

just what constitutes "objective" may be open to debate.)

Anecdotal Evidence: the most difficult kind of data to use well; doing so requires a persuasive argument that your own experience is objectively grasped and generalizable. Personal experience can, however, help bring an argument to life.

Testimonial Evidence or Expert Opinion: there exist many learned opinions which you can use for evidence. Authors must be quoted and properly cited in your paper.

Analogical Evidence: comparing your topic to another, more familiar or easily understood idea can help an audience make sense of complicated or foreign ideas.

Connecting claims to support Warrant

Definition: the warrant interprets the data and shows how it supports your claim. It explains why the data proves the claim. A philosopher would say that the warrant helps to answer the question, "What else must be true for this proposition to hold?"

A good warrant will be a reasonable interpretation of facts.

A good warrant will not make illogical interpretive leaps.

A good warrant will not assume more than the evidence supports.

A good warrant may consider and respond to possible counter-arguments.

Connecting claims to support

CLAIM DATA

WARRANT

Tuition will be increased The college has

recently incurred vast

additional expenses.

Tuition has been in the past and is likely to

continue being the principle means by which

the college pays its expenses.

This is a thing, and it is old.

What you have been practicing is something called formal logic.

The structure for an academic argument

Formal logic: Classical or traditional system of determining the

validity and soundness of a claim (conclusion) deduced from two or more statements (premises). Definition from BusinessDictionary.com

Formal logic usually uses a syllogism to make a claim.

Formal logic: Syllogism

Major premise

All men are mortal.

Minor premise

Socrates is a man.

Conclusion

Socrates is mortal.

NOTICE: Data Warrant connecting the two Claim

Formal logic: Syllogism

Major premise (data)

All men are mortal.

(subject 1) (predicate)

Minor premise (warrant)

Socrates is a man. (subject 2) (subject 1)

Conclusion (claim)

Socrates is mortal. (subject 2) (predicate)

Key points so far Claims state a position.

Data supports the position.

Warrants connect the claim to the data with a reason.

Formal logic structures an academic argument.

Formal logic uses the syllogism.

Syllogism: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Socrates is mortal.

Syllogism: Data/support Warrant Claim

Syllogism: Subject 1 and predicate Subject 1 and subject 2 Subject 2 and predicate

Syllogism: Major premise Minor premise Conclusion

Validity of a syllogism A syllogism is valid if the conclusion is the only interpretation

based on the two premises.

A syllogism is invalid if other interpretations could exist based on the premises.

The premises do not have to be true for the syllogism to be valid.

All cups are green. (major premise)

Socrates is a cup. (minor premise)

Socrates is green.(conclusion)

Validity of a syllogism Are these syllogisms valid?

Label the major premise, minor premise, and conclusion.

It is always immoral to deliberately do damage to your health.

Smoking is a deliberate act that causes damage to your health.

Smoking is immoral.

Ron’s fingerprints were found on the murder weapon.

Ron had plenty of time to commit the murder.

Ron is the murderer.

Soundness of a syllogism The premises do have to be true for a syllogism to be

sound.

Have you ever heard someone say, “That’s not a sound argument?”

To be sound, a syllogism must also be valid.

Is this syllogism valid? Is it sound?

Cruel and unusual punishments are not constitutional.

The death penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment.

The death penalty must not be allowed.

Practice time! With your table group, practice this stuff.

Identify claims, data, and warrants. Label them.

Identify major premises, minor premises, and conclusions. Label them.

Determine the validity and soundness of the syllogistic arguments on the handout.

Be ready to explain your ideas.

Write two syllogisms. Write a syllogism that is valid and sound.

Write a syllogism that is valid but not sound.

The point is not necessarily that the syllogism for your argument is valid and sound, but that you know whether it is valid and sound.

You must know where to focus your attention. Claim?

Data?

Warrant?

The enthymeme Definition: An enthymeme is a syllogism with part of the argument missing. Remember the sample syllogism? Here it is rearranged: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is

mortal. Socrates is a man, so Socrates is mortal. Socrates is mortal. The first statement is the full syllogism. The second statement has the major premise missing. The third statement has both the major and minor premises missing, offering just the conclusion.

The enthymeme

When could this be bad? If the audience cannot understand or does not believe the inherent

leap from data to claim, you have lost the argument.

When could this be good? When a part of the argument is missing, it is assumed not only to be

true, but so obvious that it is not worth including. This makes it very difficult to challenge, as questioning the obvious is an admission of ignorance, which puts oneself lower down the social order and opens oneself to attack.

It also uses and 'out of sight, out of mind' principle: when the unsafe part of the argument is missed out, then people may not realize that it has been omitted.

Advertisers and politicians make great use of enthymemes.

The enthymeme Look at that syllogism we tested for soundness again:

Cruel and unusual punishments are not Constitutional.

The death penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment.

The death penalty must not be allowed.

We decided that it may not be sound because the inhumanity of the death penalty is debatable. Truth depends on what the audience will accept.

How does the shape of the argument change if we replace the syllogism with an enthymeme? The death penalty must be repealed because it is

unconstitutional.

End day 2

Putting it all together Practice finding the missing warrant for the

enthymemes on the handout.

In each case, determine whether or not you would be explicit about the missing warrant and/or premise and why.

End day three Did not move on before research. The rest of the ppt

here is now included in the Toulmin structure ppt for after research.

Hold up there, tiger. If you are going to be effectively persuasive, you must be

appealing to your audience.

If you are going to be appealing to your audience, you must know your audience.

You can increase your ability to be persuasive by using different modes of persuasion.

Three different ways to persuade your audience

Modes of persuasion: ethos Ethos

Used to establish the honesty, character, or credibility of the speaker/writer:

Expert in the field

Vested interest in topic

Excellent argumentation

Source: European Rhetoric

Modes of persuasion: pathos Pathos

Used to appeal to the audience’s emotions:

Figurative language and imagery

Bold claims

Passionate delivery

Source: European Rhetoric

Modes of persuasion: logos Logos

Used to establish the logical thinking of the speaker/writer:

Assertion of valid, sound claim

Effective use of different kinds of evidence

Logical reasoning

Acknowledgement of other views

Source: European Rhetoric

OK. We know how to write a valid, sound claim.

We know about three different modes of persuasion.

Let’s write an awesome argument that will get us what we want.

What should it look like?

One style of organization that will present and develop your argument (this should look familiar)

Organizing an argument We will use the structure of organization called a

“classical argument.” First developed by Aristotle (Greece, 384 BC-322 BC)

Refined by philosophers like Cicero

Organized into six parts: Introduction (exordium)

Background (narratio)

Proposition (partitio)

Proof (confirmatio)

Refutation (refutatio)

Conclusion (peroratio)

Argument: introduction PURPOSE: to demonstrate to the audience that you are

a reasonable person of good will who shares core beliefs with the audience (warrants). Some classic openings include:

a quotation

a question

an anecdote

Source: Structuring an Argument, Sara Jameson

ETHOS

Argument: background PURPOSE: to define the terms used in the argument

and to explain the issues you will present. This section often includes:

Historical context

Social/cultural context

A problem leading to the “need”

Other relevant background information

Source: Moore Park College Writing Center

LOGOS

Argument: proposition PURPOSE: to state the claim and outline the major

points that will support it.

The claim/thesis goes here.

See how this could be viewed as “the thesis statement goes at the end of the first paragraph”?

See how that isn’t necessarily true?

Source: Argumentation, The University of Michigan

Argument: proof PURPOSE: to develop support for the claim using

evidence and reasons. This section includes:

Reasons and types of evidence.

Explicit connections between

claims and support

HOW?!?

Source: Moore Park College Writing Center

ETHOS PATHOS LOGOS

Argument: proof There are four distinct types of evidence that can be

used to support a claim.

See “Types of Evidence” handout.

Factual or Statistical

Anecdotal

Testimonial

Analogical

ETHOS PATHOS LOGOS

Argument: refutation PURPOSE: to acknowledge existence of other perspectives

and explain their shortcomings. This section often includes: Finding common ground with people who may think

differently

Mentioning ideas in direct conflict with your own

Providing reasons and evidence that shows

your conclusion is more reasonable.

Source: Argumentation, The University of Michigan

ETHOS PATHOS LOGOS

Argument: conclusion PURPOSE: to solidify the audience’s acceptance of

your claim. This section often includes: Summary of key points

“A final appeal to values, motivations, and feelings that are likely to encourage the audience to identify with your argument”

Source: School Pages: Argumentation

ETHOS PATHOS LOGOS

In review… An academic argument is a claim supported by

evidence.

An academic argument is based in formal logic.

A syllogism tests the validity and soundness of a claim.

The modes of persuasion (ethos, pathos, and logos) work differently to affect an audience.

The classical argument structure has six parts: introduction, background, proposition, proof, refutation, and conclusion.

What you are expected to do: Standards: 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4

Homework for Tuesday night: Read the short article about college rankings.

Mark the text to identify each section of the argument (introduction, background, proposition, proof, refutation, and conclusion)

Mark the text to show where the author has used each mode of persuasion (ethos, pathos, and logos)

I can: Introduce a knowledgeable claim I can: Identify and effectively use the most appropriate modes of persuasion for my purpose I can: Develop an argument for the claim using valid reasoning and sufficient and appropriate evidence, selecting the most significant facts, details, and evidence to develop my argument I can: Use precise language and vocabulary and maintain a formal style