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 included a citation to the provided grounds from a scholarly source. Second, a qualifier is a word or phase that demonstrates the force of the argument. It can help portray the confidence of the claim, as well as the speakers confidence in the claim and desire to be held accountable for his argument. Finally, rebuttal/reservation kind of sets the base for questions that could be made against the argument, as well as highlights some of the limits the presented argument holds.
To further explain how these concepts work/ how the Model of an Argument works, I would like to present an example from my life. I once said the following, "We need to have a 24 hour rule for our dishes because, with 5 of us, the dishes will pile up quickly."
I believe my claim was that the dishes should be done within 24 hours. My grounds was, "with 5 of us, the dishes will pile up quickly." My warrant would be that we want to keep our apartment clean and be considerate roommates. I can't think of a good backing example here, but the book said it's not always necessary and is far more necessary in a controversial argument; this isn't really a major argument like that. I believe my qualifier would be "we need" because it shows strong force behind the argument. Finally, the rebuttal/reservations could be a lack of time to do dishes, or if others don't do theirs, why should I do mine, or even, perhaps cleanliness of the apartment isn't as important to other roommates.
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 included a citation to the provided grounds from a scholarly source. Second, a qualifier is a word or phase that demonstrates the force of the argument. It can help portray the confidence of the claim, as well as the speakers confidence in the claim and desire to be held accountable for his argument. Finally, rebuttal/reservation kind of sets the base for questions that could be made against the argument, as well as highlights some of the limits the presented argument holds.
To further explain how these concepts work/ how the Model of an Argument works, I would like to present an example from my life. I once said the following, "We need to have a 24 hour rule for our dishes because, with 5 of us, the dishes will pile up quickly."
I believe my claim was that the dishes should be done within 24 hours. My grounds was, "with 5 of us, the dishes will pile up quickly." My warrant would be that we want to keep our apartment clean and be considerate roommates. I can't think of a good backing example here, but the book said it's not always necessary and is far more necessary in a controversial argument; this isn't really a major argument like that. I believe my qualifier would be "we need" because it shows strong force behind the argument. Finally, the rebuttal/reservations could be a lack of time to do dishes, or if others don't do theirs, why should I do mine, or even, perhaps cleanliness of the apartment isn't as important to other roommates.
I really liked your real-world example of breaking down an argument. You mentioned that there may not be a need for backing here, but I wonder if presenting evidence of having a clean home would be beneficial. Like you said, if you are just chatting with your roommates about your preference for living in a clean space, you probably don't need to cite any studies. However, if you were a landlord, this may be something that would be valuable to have your tenants be aware of, both for their environment and your investment. I think it is interesting how breaking down an argument makes you realize that there are different ways it may be interpreted or used.
ReplyDelete