Argumentation Theory

1,486 views
1,216 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology, Spiritual
2 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,486
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
50
Comments
2
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Argumentation Theory

  1. 1. {5 THINGS} should know about every comm. studentARGUMENTATION*THEORY
  2. 2. #1 WHAT THE HECK IS IT?
  3. 3. >>>> ARGUMENTATION THEORY, or argumentation, is the study of how conclusions can be reached through LOGICAL REASONING*
  4. 4. *   which means CLAIMS (sound or not) are based on premises
  5. 5. IT INCLUDESthe arts and sciences of
  6. 6. >> CIVIL DEBATE
  7. 7. >> CONVERSATION
  8. 8. DIALOGUE  
  9. 9. and… >> PERSUASION
  10. 10. WHO USES IT?#2
  11. 11. { the truth is }EVERYBODY *ARGUES
  12. 12. >>>>>>> the difference is the TYPE of argument >>>>>>>>>>  
  13. 13. THERE IS…CONVERSATIONAL ARGUMENTATION
  14. 14. scientific and mathematicalargumentation
  15. 15. LEGAL ARGUMENTATION
  16. 16. …and  finally  POLITICAL A RGUMENTATION
  17. 17. #3 SO WHAT?
  18. 18. why argue? >> when  it  comes  down  to  it,  we   argue  because  we  want   something…  
  19. 19. n or der…a nd i ha t youto g et w un eed wan t, yo with ego tiate to n ple… o ther peo
  20. 20. >> Improving your communication skills, i.e., improving your arguing skills, will helpso, to ‘GET WHAT YOU WANT’ is one reason for arguing
  21. 21. { } Other reasons toargue are to find outwhat you believe and what other people believe and why.
  22. 22. CRITICISM #4
  23. 23. * argumentation theory had its origins in foundationalism, (a field of philosophy)
  24. 24. >>>>>It sought to find thegrounds for claimsin the forms (logic)and materials(factual laws) of auniversal system ofknowledge
  25. 25. BUT…
  26. 26. phy phi loso em atic syst tlesA risto
  27. 27. *They QUESTIONED andultimately DISCARDED theidea that argumentpremises take theirsoundness from formalPHILOSOPHICAL systems
  28. 28. THUS THE FIELD BROADENEDand this caused an ongoing debate >>>>>>>
  29. 29. some scholars construe the term "argument" narrowly { as exclu even disco sively written urse in which discourse or are explicit all premises }
  30. 30. while others construe the term "argument" broadly to include spok { en and even } nonverbal disco to include spok urse en and even nonverba l discourse
  31. 31. *The dispute betweenbroad and narrowtheorists is of longstanding and isunlikely to be settled.
  32. 32. #5 HOW TO ARGUE BETTER
  33. 33. “ Unlike arming people with gunsor bombs, no one will die from being armed with the techniques of ” argument. -Michael Gilbert
  34. 34. * >>> KEY POINTERSfor arguing effectively
  35. 35. {know why you are arguing } What is your purpose? Do you believe you can achieve your purp ose?
  36. 36. {know WHAT you arearguing } What is YOUR claim? What is your co-arguer’s claim? about What reasons support your claim?
  37. 37. >>DON’T ARGUE WITH FANATICS! (Assume that people have reasons for their beliefs: Do not argue with people who don’t, and limit your arguing when people don’t have "good" reasons)
  38. 38. …and finally LISTEN! just listen, argue, listen, argue If you can restate what they said andshow you really did listen, the co-arguer is more likely to listen to you!
  39. 39. Image  credit  in  order  of  which  they  appear  Chu,  H.  (Photographer).  (2010).  Associated  press.  [Web  Graphic].  Retrieved  from         h8p://www.cleveland.com/world/index.ssf/2010/04/tv_poliDcal_debates_for_1st_t.html  (2008).  Two  men  engaged  in  conversaDon.  (2008).  [Web  Photo].  Retrieved  from       h8p://web.expasy.org/spotlight/back_issues/091/  (2011).  argument.  (2011).  [Web  Photo].  Retrieved  from     h8p://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/5-­‐ways-­‐to-­‐win-­‐an-­‐argument/  (2010).  logo  poliDcs.  (2010).  [Web  Photo].  Retrieved  from       h8p://thebrandbuilder.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/logo-­‐poliDcs1.jpg  (2012).  chalkboard  formula.  (2012).  [Web  Photo].  Retrieved  from   h8p://www.niemanlab.org/2012/03/the-­‐newsonomics-­‐of-­‐crossover/  (2008).  Retro  tv  commercial.  (2008).  [Web  Photo].  Retrieved  from   h8p://potenDal2success.com/the-­‐persuasion-­‐experiment-­‐5-­‐persuasion-­‐techniques-­‐tested.html/ trackback  (2011).  law.  (2011).  [Web  Photo].  Retrieved  from   h8p://blog.thansys.com/wp-­‐content/uploads/2011/07/law.jpg  (2007).  loving  divorce.  (2007).  [Web  Photo].  Retrieved  from   h8p://community.servicenow.com/blog/slightlyloony/argal-­‐argument-­‐puzzler  

×