Skip to main content

Chapter 6: Blog Post


              In this blog post I will talk about the preliminary steps in creating a good argumentative case. When building an argumentative case, the temptation is to start thinking about the argument, doing some research to find supporting materials to make claims. But there is some preliminary work that needs to be done, and failure to this often leads to poor arguments. The preliminary steps include Identify the ultimate purpose, State the proposition and Assess presumptions and burden of proof.

              The ultimate purpose is what you want to accomplish with your case. This is not simply the desire that people will adhere to your argument. But what the ultimate objective would look like or what would a successful outcome look like. If you’re not sure what you are trying to accomplish, then the chances are you will not accomplish it. The author gives an example of the ‘war in drugs’ and how diverging from the main goal which was to reduce the affects of drugs on people has led them to fail and their focus has become punishing and hurting people using illegal drugs. Which was never the ultimate purpose.

              A preposition is a claim that expresses the judgment that decision makers are asked to accept or reject. The preposition on its own makes no sense but it helps the argument to advance and each preposition should help the process. The author talks about the example of buying a car. One of the propositions the author talks about is understanding how the car dealing works wo you can get the best deal.

              The Assess presumptions and burden of proof is defined as a claim that can stand against a sufficient reason from the other side and can handle the burden to prove their claim. The author talks about the example if marriage and states the history of marriage between a man and woman. The idea of same sex marriage is not widely accepted and therefore it always has the burden of proof.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Chap 5

Chapter five focuses primarily on identifying and developing propositions for problems that people think are relevant. It goes over 6 steps for choosing a valid proposition based on a perceived “feeling of doubt.” While all six steps may not be necessary, the collectively ensure a well thought out and firm proposition. The six steps include identifying the question, surveying implicated objectives (or understanding what is the goal accomplishment in regard to the question), searching for new information, considering alternative options, considering costs and risks of each potential proposition, and then finally choosing one of the propositions. The authors then go on to talk about analyzing and strengthening the proposition chosen. This includes identification and ranking of the issues that the proposition addresses as well as understanding how the decision makers will react to these issues and propositions. In general, with all these methods of critically analyzing the proposition, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Chapter 10

There were a couple of terms I found in this chapter that I wish were explained a little more. First, the concept of uncritical responses to refutation is only covered briefly. I think that this is one of the most fundamental barriers to effective public argumentation in the United States right now. I find this issue most concerning for the liberal party. Recalling the last election and the concept of 'incremental' argumentation, I feel that people demonstrated a massive failure of critical thinking by voting for third parties or not voting. People who were disappointed with Hillary Clinton's candidacy in place of Bernie Sanders decided to either continue voting for Bernie or not vote altogether. Neither of these strategies amounted to effective support of their cause, and they constitute the uncritical "knee-jerk" reaction described in this chapter. In this case, uncritical response to opposition worked directly against the interests of the decision-makers. A...
1 comment
Read more

Chaper 8

Chapter 8 of Argumentation and Critical Decision Making continues down the route of talking about support for argumentation. This chapter specifically focuses on values as support for arguments, how to recognize them and the best ways to attack them. Values are defined as “ concepts of what is desirable that arguers use and decision makers understand” (121).  There are several types of values mentioned such as stated, implied, positive, negative, terminal, instrumental, abstract and concrete values.  Stated values are state directly what concepts they hold. For example, words such as “freedom” or “health” are stated values because they mean exactly what they're trying to portray. Not all values are as explicit. Some are more vague and called implied values. One of the examples that the book uses to show the contrast between the two is in the case of work equality. When talking about the subject saying, “ Equal pay for equal work” would be a stated value and “ Women deserve th...
Post a Comment
Read more