COMM 3615: Argumentation (FA18)

Chapter 4 was about the Toulmin argument model.   This model tells us to analyze an argument with through six different lenses.   These six lenses are: claim, grounds, warrant, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal/reservation.   While all six are important, I think that backing is the most vital to a strong argument.   If I hear an argument that has strong support from outside sources, I am definitely more likely to believe that it is valid.   That does not mean I have to agree with how the facts are used or what the facts are supporting, but I think it gives the argument more strength. After discussing how to analyze arguments, the chapter talks about types of arguments.   They are argument by generalization, cause, sign, analogy, and authority.   I had never thought of argument by analogy before reading this chapter, but I do use analogies in my arguments all the time.   I didn’t realize it was actually a type of argumentation.   If we can give our audience an example of a similar a

In Chapter 4, the Model of an Argument created  by Stephen Toulmin is introduced in order to analyze arguments and explain their parts and interrelationships (Peterson et al, pg. 53). When evaluating an argument we use the model to identify an argument's claim, grounds, warrants, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal/reservation. As defined by the authors, a claim “is the end goal of the argument, and it is the place where arguments begin” (Peterson et al, pg. 53). Then, the grounds follow the claim which support the argument being made by answering questions that provide evidence. However, grounds are usually not enough for decision makers to “grant adherence to the claim” so they are backed up by warrants or a statement that adds value to the claim being made. Additionally, I believe that the rebuttal/reservation of an argument is essential to increasing the strength and influence over decision makers. When making an argument it is important to keep in mind how it can be que

For this week's blog post, I'm going to be discussing the Model of an Argument. While most people think that an argument consists of 3 main parts (claim, grounds, and warrant), this chapter expanded upon that to include 3 more parts (backing, qualifier, and rebuttal/reservation) to the Model of an Argument. I'm going to begin by doing a quick breakdown of these elements of the Model of an Argumentation. First, a claim is the point you are trying to make with the argument. Whether it be a view that you are trying to get your audience to share, or an action you are trying to persuade them to partake in. Second, the grounds of an argument is the facts, support and evidence that supports your claim. Third, the warrant is an underlying value statement that supports the argument; it can be stated or implied. Now, I'm going to get into the 3 parts that were a bit newer to me. First, backing is any support that can make the evidence/grounds stronger. In the book, they

          Chapter Four is especially useful as it illustrates how arguments are built and formed. In particular, the Toulmin model, as explained by the authors, is an extremely intuitive way of understanding the building blocks of all arguments. As mentioned by the authors, “all arguments can be diagrammed by a variation of the Toulmin model, which illustrates how a claim can be justified only by showing that there are warranted grounds for it” (Rieke, Sillars, & Peterson, 69). Indeed, by understanding how the Toulmin model works, one can easily assess whether an argument is strong or weak, based on the elements that are present.             As stated, the Toulmin model identifies various elements that, when used in tandem, form strong arguments. A claim, or “the idea or action for which you are seeking adherence” (Rieke, Sillars, & Peterson, 53), is the basic starting point of all arguments. Almost all arguments require claims to achieve their goals. Claims are backed up b

In chapter 4, the authors discuss the nature of arguments.  They first discuss this concept by explaining how an argument should be modeled as they evaluate the Toulmin Model.  The Toulmin Model has become the standard pattern for arguments as it employs claims, grounds, warrants, backings, qualifiers, and rebuttals or reservations in order to form a strong and effective argument.  The authors then further expand on the concept of the Toulmin Model as they talk about how it can differ in various forms of arguments. One of the common arguments that the authors write about is argument by authority, and I found this concept to interest me the most.  An argument by authority aids in the belief that a claim is justified because it is held by a credible person.  The authors also believe that the most common way of presenting an argument is to cite authority.   So, I found the concept of argument by authority to interest me and relate to me the most because I frequently listen to my paren

In chapter 4 we take a look at the importance of understanding argument structures. We are able to look at the Toulmin model. It is a tool that is used to analyze an argument to see the components of one. The model is made up of several different filters to which we can look at an argument. According to the model an argument must have a claim, grounds, warrant, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal/reservation. This tool allows us to analyze an argument and ask the question “Is this a good argument?”. I think this is important because without any criteria as talked about before in chapter 2, an argument won’t have standards to which it has to meet. Also in chapter 4 we take a look at the reasoning processes and what the commonplaces of the reasoning’s are. There are several commonplaces which “Constitute the basis of most arguments” as according to the textbook. (Pg. 57). The processes are, logic or deduction, generalization, cause, sign, analogy and authority. I will look dee

Arguments are are composed up of various parts. In its most simple form, they are comprised of grounds, warrants, and claims. They are what allow us to determine if we accept the argument or not. The point that we try to get across to people is the claim. The claim is what we want people to accept in the argument. How we get to the claim is based on the grounds that we can provide. The grounds are evidence to our claim, such as physical examples or other ways that support the claim we are trying to prove. The warrant is a little bit more complicated to wrap your head around, but it is a form of logical reasoning that he have that can either be implied in the grounds, or explicitly stated to help us reach the claim through the grounds we provide. It is the metaphorical vehicle that drives the argument. In other words, why we should accept the grounds that are provided to help us reach the claim.   To strengthen the argument further, we can also provide backing, qualifiers,

In chapter 4, the topic of how arguments begin has come up, and in this portion of the book it explains who started the perfect setup to start a good argument and how to do it. The model of an argument began by a man named Stephen Toulmin. He created this model to help people understand the parts of an argument and their interrelationships. In his standard pattern of an argument, Toulmin states that an argument must have six factors in it to make it a valid argument. The six factors that it must have is claims, grounds, warrants, backing, qualifiers, and rebuttals. If you were to look for these factors in any argument it would help you analyze the argument more efficiently and decide is it a good or bad argument. In an argument, you always begin with a claim. A claim is your statement or idea that you are trying to get people to make sense of. Then, to back up your claim you use the grounds portion of the model. The grounds portion is the primary source that supports