Skip to main content

Chapter 4 blog post 3


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 your claim. People tend to question your claim and your grounds are supposed to help back that up so it is more believable. Next, the warrant is the part of the model that connects the grounds to the claim with a statement. It shows that the grounds in your argument actually supports the claim and pushes your argument to become more believable. In some cases, those three factors are what you need to begin and win an argument but for some people, they would want more. If you meet that person who would want more, then you would need the next step which is backing. Backing is anything else that strengthens your claim. It could be stats, testimonies, or anything that is more specific to support your claim. Also, for those people who would want more, you could add a rebuttal in your argument to make it even more reasonable and believable. A rebuttal is where you critique your own claim and ask yourself questions to make it stronger. This allows you to do your own critiquing and allow you to see your argument from the other side so therefore you know what to fix and what could make your argument even stronger. I think the Toulmin model is a great way to analyze and start an argument. I have personally used it before and think it helps with making a strong argument because you have a standard plan of what you suppose to have in an strong argument.

Comments

  1. AnonymousOctober 3, 2018 at 8:47 AM

    I definitely agree with you that the Toulmin Model is a very useful tool to consider when constructing arguments. It makes it much more possible that the opposed party will agree with your side of the argument if you have grounds, warrants, and backing for your claim. I think having a standard plan or something to refer to if always useful, however every argument is different, just like every person you will encounter is different. With that being said I don't think someone can just follow the model religiously for every argument. But if you're considering the strength of your argument I feel the Toulmin Model is very effective, just not always practical to consider in the heat of the moment.

    ReplyDelete

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