Structuring Arguments

Please take out a sheet of loose leaf. Title and date it.

My Expectations

I expect each person to present an argument that will allow for civil discussion afterwards. How will present your controversial argument in a way that promotes a healthy and mature discussion of your topic?

Your goal is to get people to agree with you, or, at the very least, come away with an understanding of the side of the argument you chose to pursue instead of an outright dismissal.

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/impeachment-vote/2861338?snl=1

Structuring Arguments

• Most writers purposely structure their arguments in order to effectively make their point.
• Today’s question: How can you best structure your argument in order to get the best reception from your classmates?

3

• Just like anything else, choosing the structure of your argument depends on what you are saying and to whom you are saying it.

Structuring Arguments

• Read the paragraph under “Presenting Evidence” on pages 97-98 in The Language of Composition. (1 paragraph)
• Read the paragraphs under “Relevant, Accurate, and Sufficient Evidence” (3 paragraphs)
• Answer this question:
• What should a speaker/writer keep in mind when choosing the structure of their argument
• When choosing their evidence? Why?

​

Rhetorical Triangle

Who is your audience?

• Think about your fellow students and friends at Washington-Lee:
• Age range of students?
• Male to female ratio?
• Political views found among student body?
• Religions?
• Interests?

​

​

Your Argument and Audience

Think about your particular argument and the audience you are facing. Is your argument a tough sell to your audience, or will most agree with you? Write down a few sentences.

​

Your answer will inform how you structure your argument.

Will your audience pretty much agree with you? With a few exceptions?

-Then a “classical” argument would probably be fine because you will not have to spend a lot of time convincing people that your argument is worth paying attention to.

-The “classical” argument is the typical structure you would use in an essay, except you may stretch some of the pieces to multiple paragraphs (slides) if you needed to.

​

Classic Oration

• Exordium- Speaker/writer wins attention and goodwill of an audience while introducing a subject or problem

​

• Narratio- The speaker/writer presents the facts of the case, explaining what happened when, who is involved, and so on. Puts the argument in context.

​

• Partitio- Speaker/writer divides up the subject, explaining what the claim is, what the key issues are, and in what order the subject will be treated.

​

10

Classic Oration

• Confirmatio-Speaker/writer offers detailed support for the claim, using both logical reasoning and factual evidence.

​

• Refutatio-Speaker/writer acknowledges and then refutes opposing claims or evidence.

​

• Peroratio-The speaker/writer summarizes the case and moves the audience to action.

​

​

11

Structure of Classic Argument

• Hook
• Background (Amount varies depending on your audience)
• Thesis
• Body paragraphs elaborating thesis
• Rebuttal
• Conclusion

12

What if your audience is less receptive to what you are saying?

• You may need to use a “Rogerian” or Toulmin type argument.

​

13

Rogerian Argument

• Too many discussions about serious issues were still ending in screaming matches, so psychologist Carl Rogers came up with a less confrontational approach.
• Steers clear of heated and stereotypical language

14

Rogerian Structure

• Introduction-Writer describes the issue. Description is rich enough to demonstrate the writer fully understands and respects alternative positions.

​

• Context- Writer describes the contexts in which the alternative positions may be valid.

15

Rogerian Argument, cont…

• Writer’s position-Writer states their position on the issue and presents the circumstances in which that opinion would be valid.

​

• Benefits to opponent-Writer explains to opponents how they would benefit from adopting this point of view.

​

• Key to this argument is a willingness to think about opposing positions and describe them fairly

16

Rogerian Structure

• Introduction: Thorough description of both sides of the issue
• Context: Writer describes situations where alternative views are valid
• Take a stand: Writer explains their view and when it is valid
• Benefits: Writer describes benefits to opponents
• Wrap up

​

17

Toulmin Argument

• Takes into account the variability of life, so words such as “sometimes, often, presumably, unless, and almost” may be used.

​

• Begins with a claim, which is a debatable and controversial statement or assertion which you hope to prove.

​

• Example: Vegetarianism is the best choice of diet.

18

Toulmin Argument

• In a Toulmin argument, the writer works hard to back up all claims with evidence and reasons.

​

• The Toulmin method goes a step further than the first two in that all of the connections between claims and reasons, called warrants, are explained.

19

Warrants

• A warrant tells readers what your (often unstated) assumptions are.

​

• You are looking for the reasons that justifies moving from a reason to a specific claim.

​

• Example: Don’t eat that mushroom: it’s poisonous.

​

What is the warrant?

​

20

Warrant Diagram�(Very Obvious Example)

21

The mushroom is poisonous

SO don’t eat it

Since

Eating poisonous things is dangerous.

• In the Toulmin model, you would then have to provide evidence to support your warrants AND your claims.

22

Which structure will you choose for your argument?

• Classic
• Rogerian

Stop here.

More Examples

25

The Electoral

College gives

small states undo influence

So it should

abolished.

No states should have

Undue influence on presidential

Elections.

More Examples

26

Joe Joe has been

drinking since

age 14 without problems.

So the legal

age allowed for

drinking should

Be lowered.

What’s good for Joe-Joe

should work for everyone else

What is the warrant?

• Claim: The government should help NASA fund a human expedition to Mars because Americans need a unifying national goal.

​

• What is the warrant? (In your head you should be asking yourself…so? Why is this important?)

​

​

27

Example

• Warrant: What unifies the nation ought to be a national priority.

​

• Evidence:

Logical appeal: In the past, big government investments such as the Tennessee Valley Authority, Hoover Dam, and Apollo moon program were top priorities that enabled many Americans to work toward common goals.

28

Claim: NASA should launch…

• Logical appeal as evidence:

​

Successfully managing a Mars mission would require the cooperation of the entire nation-and generate tens of thousands of jobs.

29

• You only need to define your warrants until you and the reader are on the same ground.

​

• Obviously, it would be really easy to identify warrants until you were blue in the face. Use with care.

30

Qualifiers

• Toulmin system acknowledges that the world is not black and white and therefore supports the use of qualifiers

​

• Qualifiers-words and phrases that place limits on claims

​

Example: In most cases, people who don’t go to college earn less than those who do .

31

Qualifiers

32

Elements of a Toulmin Argument

• Claim
• Qualifier
• Good Reasons
• Warrants
• Backing
• Evidence
• Authority
• Conditions of Rebuttal
• Response

33

Exit Response: Match the words on the left to the nouns on the right.

34

The Small Stuff

• How to make your arguments air tight.

35

Extra Slides (2018)

Parts of an Argument

• Traditionally, logical arguments use a mix of inductive and deductive structures

​

• The next question in your head should be…?

37

• If you can construct sound inductive or deductive arguments and present them clearly, you will influence most audiences.

38

Inductive Reasoning

• Inductive reasoning is the process of generalizing on the basis of a number of specific examples.

​

• For example:

Jordan get hives after eating crawdads.

Jordan’s mouth swells up when she eats clams.

Shrimp triggers Jordan’s asthma.

Shellfish makes Jordan ill.

​

​

39

Deductive Reasoning

• On the other hand, deductive reasoning reaches a conclusion by assuming a general principle and then applying it to a specific case.

​

• Example:

Shellfish makes Chris Q. sick.

Lobster is a type of shellfish.

​

Lobster will make Chris Q. ill.

​

Fancy name for a deductive chain of reasoning: syllogism

40

The BIG Stuff

• What will your overall organizational scheme be?

​

• Classic or Rogerian?

41

30 Second Summary

• Turn to a partner and summarize what you just heard without the help of your note-taking guide. Include the words inductive, deductive, & syllogism

​

• Partner-listen and add in any missing details.

​

• Switch next time.

42

Create an Outline Template For the Classic Structure

• What would be the basic overall structure of a “classic argument?”

​

• Create a basic outline template in your own words

​

​

43

Summary

• At your table, discuss the three argumentative structures presented over the course of this PowerPoint.
• How are they similar?
• How are they different?

44

Why did this work for the kid and not the dad?

• http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/microsoft-dog-ppt-tv-commercial/qm3dr7uv

45