Comm 1200 Argumentation: May 2017

Example: The dispute that would occur when someone disagreed with the above stated claim. For instance, someone could respond to the claim offered above by arguing that health care is a privilege and not a right, and thus it is the responsibility of all people to provide for their own health care needs and for the healthcare needs of their family. They might support that argument by claiming that if people were able to access the healthcare system without needing to pay they would perhaps overuse doctors, hospitals, and prescription drugs to treat only very minor ailments thus taking up valuable resources that could be devoted to other, sicker patients. Or they might argue that providing access to health care for all citizens might be so very expensive that it would require a very steep tax increase ad raising taxes would damage the economy and lead to a loss of job and new investments for business development that could grow the economy and create more economic opportunities for all citizens

it is possible to make argument (argument 1) without engaging in disputes or disagreements ( argument 2 )

people will accept stories as true if these stories speak to them and account for their experiences. Walter R. Fisher has argued that people reason through narratives. He referred to this mode of reasoning as the narrative paradigm, which he summarized as follows

(1) Humans are... storytellers (2) The paradigmatic mode of human decision making and communication is "good reasons" which vary in form among situations, genres, and media of communication. (3) The production and practice of good reasons are ruled by matters of history, biography, culture and character...(4) Rationality is determined by the nature of persons as narrative beings--- their inherent awareness of narrative probability, what constitutes a coherent story, and constant habit of testing narrative fidelity, whether or not the stories they experience ring true with the stories they know to be true in their own lives... (5) the world as we know it is a set of stories that must be chosen among in order for us to live life in process of continual re-creation

narrative probability - whether a story seems coherent this is the argumentative structure of the story satisfying and complete
narrative fidelity - concerns whether a story represents accurate about social reality

this dimension of narrative reasoning is firmly rooted in the human capacity for making judgments about issues of value.

the very act of naming-the choice of one symbolic referent over another-helps to form our attitudes and values

This universal audience is not an actual, existing one but is instead but is instead created in the mind of the arguer

they believed by using this abstract audience as a reference point for evaluating arguments, one can better tailor arguments to a broad range of potential audience members

is a rationale for freedom of expression based on an analogy to the economic concept of a free market. The "marketplace of ideas" holds that the truth will emerge from the competition of ideas in free, transparent public discourse.

a proposition of fact is in dispute. For example, two friends who are having an argument about the hottest place in the United States are disputing a proposition of fact. Thus the statement, "Death Valley is the hottest place in the country," is a proposition of fact. The rival position, "Corpus Christi is the hottest place in the country," is also a proposition of fact. While propositions of this type readily lend themselves to argument, the are also typically through the appropriate empirical evidence

argument by example examines one or more cases within a specific class and reasons that if these cases have certain common features, then other, as yet unknown cases in that class will also have these features.

hasty generalization- arguments from examples to a generalization that move too quickly or without sufficient rationale
a fallacy is a flaw in the reasoning process

an argument of analogy seeks to identify similarities between cases that might on the surface seem to be quite dissimilar, in order t permit an interference to be drawn.
2 types of analogies

a literal analogy is a statement drawing a direct comparison between two or more cases.
a figurative analogy is a statement that makes comparisons between classes that are materially dissimilar from each other but that are nonetheless suggestive of each other materially dissimilar from each other but that are nonetheless suggestive of each other in some characteristic manner

while few artifacts of argument exhibit all of the elements of the tulmin model, and while abstracting an argument from its social context in order to diagram it risks distorting, and oversimplifying it, the toulmin model is a useful tool for understanding the components of argument and it provides real insight into the reasoning process that arguers use. Once you understand the elements of argument, and it provides real insight into the reasoning process that arguers use
the six components

claim: conclusion of the argument; that statement which the advocate wishes the audience to believe
Grounds: foundation or basis for the claim; the support
Warrant: reasoning that authorizes the inferential leap from the grounds to the claim
Backing: support for the warrant
Modality: degree of certainty with which the advocate makes the claim
Rebutal: exceptions that might be offered to the claim

Shared pemise enjoy presumption with audiences. That is, audiences tend to believe these premises until convinced otherwise
Contradictory premise - An argument (generally considered a logical fallacy) that draws a conclusion from inconsistent or incompatible premises. Essentially, a proposition is contradictory when it asserts and denies the same thing.
Public opinion - views prevalent among the general public.
Private Opinion - views which you have that are not shown to the public

Comm 1200 Argumentation