• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Argumentation Theory
 

Argumentation Theory

on

  • 713 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
713
Views on SlideShare
713
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
14
Comments
1

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel

11 of 1 previous next

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Argumentation Theory Argumentation Theory Presentation Transcript

    • {5 THINGS} should know about every comm. studentARGUMENTATION*THEORY
    • #1 WHAT THE HECK IS IT?
    • >>>> ARGUMENTATION THEORY, or argumentation, is the study of how conclusions can be reached through LOGICAL REASONING*
    • *   which means CLAIMS (sound or not) are based on premises
    • IT INCLUDESthe arts and sciences of
    • >> CIVIL DEBATE
    • >> CONVERSATION
    • DIALOGUE  
    • and… >> PERSUASION
    • WHO USES IT?#2
    • { the truth is }EVERYBODY *ARGUES
    • >>>>>>> the difference is the TYPE of argument >>>>>>>>>>  
    • THERE IS…CONVERSATIONAL ARGUMENTATION
    • scientific and mathematicalargumentation
    • LEGAL ARGUMENTATION
    • …and  finally  POLITICAL A RGUMENTATION
    • #3 SO WHAT?
    • why argue? >> when  it  comes  down  to  it,  we   argue  because  we  want   something…  
    • 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
    • >> Improving your communication skills, i.e., improving your arguing skills, will helpso, to ‘GET WHAT YOU WANT’ is one reason for arguing
    • { } Other reasons toargue are to find outwhat you believe and what other people believe and why.
    • CRITICISM #4
    • * argumentation theory had its origins in foundationalism, (a field of philosophy)
    • >>>>>It sought to find thegrounds for claimsin the forms (logic)and materials(factual laws) of auniversal system ofknowledge
    • BUT…
    • phy phi loso em atic syst tlesA risto
    • *They QUESTIONED andultimately DISCARDED theidea that argumentpremises take theirsoundness from formalPHILOSOPHICAL systems
    • THUS THE FIELD BROADENEDand this caused an ongoing debate >>>>>>>
    • some scholars construe the term "argument" narrowly { as exclu even disco sively written urse in which discourse or are explicit all premises }
    • 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
    • *The dispute betweenbroad and narrowtheorists is of longstanding and isunlikely to be settled.
    • #5 HOW TO ARGUE BETTER
    • “ Unlike arming people with gunsor bombs, no one will die from being armed with the techniques of ” argument. -Michael Gilbert
    • * >>> KEY POINTERSfor arguing effectively
    • {know why you are arguing } What is your purpose? Do you believe you can achieve your purp ose?
    • {know WHAT you arearguing } What is YOUR claim? What is your co-arguer’s claim? about What reasons support your claim?
    • >>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)
    • …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!
    • 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