Skip to main content

Chapter 4

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 argument or situation, they may be more likely to accept our argument because they can relate something familiar to it. 


Finally, I think defining the argument is incredibly important.  While we may think what we are trying to prove is obvious, so many times it is not clear to the other person.  All of a sudden you’re ten minutes into a conversation, you clarify your argument, and the other person finally agrees with you simply because they did not know exactly the point you were trying to make.  It’s like a thesis statement in a paper: without it, there really is no point. 

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