Argumentative essay - Structuring and analyzing arguments

1. Structuring and Analyzing
Arguments:
The Classical and Toulmin,
Models
Junior AP English
September 23,
2008

2. Key Terms: Deductive vs. Inductive
Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning = in traditional Aristotelian
logic, the process of reasoning in which a conclusion
follows necessarily from the stated premises;
inference by reasoning from the general to the
specific
 Inductive Reasoning = the process of reasoning
from the specific to the general, in which the
premises of an argument are believed to support the
conclusion but do not ensure it. Inductive reasoning
is used to formulate laws based on limited
observations of recurring patterns.

3. Inductive Reasoning, Continued
 In literary and rhetorical analysis,
use inductive reasoning. Base your
analysis on the evidence in the text
(or backpack).
 In persuasive/expository argument
writing, it is still a good strategy to
collect evidence and see where it
leads you, rather than forcing the
data to fit your claim.

4. Classical Argument
 Began in ancient Greece, approximately fifth
century B.C.
 Communicated orally and designed to be
easily understood by listeners
 Based on formal logic, including the
syllogism
 Six main components

5. Key Terms: The Syllogism
 Three-part deductive argument, in
which conclusion follows from two
premises
 A straightforward example:
Major premise: All people have hearts.
Minor premise: John is a person.
Conclusion: Therefore, John has a
heart.

6. Classical Argument: Six Elements
1) Introduction: captures attention of audience; urges
audience to consider your case
2) Statement of Background: narrates the key facts
and/or events leading up to your case
3) Proposition: states the position you are taking,
based on the information you’ve already
presented, and sets up the structure of the rest of
your argument
4) Proof: discusses your reasons for your position and
provides evidence to support each reason
5) Refutation: anticipates opposing viewpoints; then
demonstrates why your approach is the only
acceptable one (i.e. better than your opponents’)
6) Conclusion: summarizes your most important points
and can include appeals to feelings or values
(pathos and ethos)

7. The Toulmin Model
 Developed by British philosopher
Stephen Toulmin in the 1950’s
 Emphasizes that real-life logic often
based on probability rather than
certainty
 Focuses on claims that are based on
evidence (inductive)
 Three primary components

8. Toulmin Model: Three Components
 Three components:
Data = the evidence that leads one
to believe the claim, aka the
reasons
Claim = the main point or position
Warrant = an underlying assumption
or basic principle that connects data
and claim; often implied rather than
explicit

9. Toulmin Model: An Example
Data = The parents of nearly all of the juniors
at UHS have given their children permission
to attend Joe Shmo’s party on Friday night.
Claim = My parents should allow me to go to
Joe’s party.
Warrant = My parents should act in
accordance with the other parents of
juniors at UHS.

10. Uh-oh, a potential snag…
What if my parents don’t “buy” my
warrant? What if they don’t think
they should necessarily do what
other parents are doing?
How can I still get permission to
attend the party? Or at least have
a better chance of getting
permission?

11. Try new data and a new warrant.
What might be more convincing
data for an audience of parents?
What might be a warrant that most
parents will share?

12. Toulmin Argumentation in More Detail
Claim
Data
Qualifier
Warrant
Backing
Rebuttal
since
because
; therefore,
unless