Logos -toulmin.revised
โข
2 likesโข5,311 views
The document discusses the key components of an argument, including claim, reason, warrant, backing, grounds, rebuttal, and qualifier. It uses examples to explain each component. The terms were originally developed by Stephen Toulmin to analyze arguments. Readers are then prompted to construct their own argument using the defined structure and terms.
Report
Share
Report
Share
Download to read offline
Recommended
Logos -toulmin
Here is a possible argument structure:
Claim: All students should be required to take AP Language in order to graduate.
Grounds: AP Language teaches important critical thinking and writing skills.
Reason: These skills are necessary for college and career success.
Backing: Employers value strong communication abilities. Research shows the cognitive benefits of advanced language courses.
Warrant: High school graduation requirements should ensure students are prepared for post-secondary education/work.
Rebuttal: Some students may not be ready for an AP-level course. Alternative options could also provide the same skills.
Qualifier: Requiring AP Language is reasonable but exceptions should be made for those who cannot succeed in that
Logos -toulmin
Here is a possible argument structure for the claim that all students should be required to take AP Language in order to graduate:
Claim: All students should be required to take AP Language in order to graduate.
Reason: Because it will improve their writing and critical thinking skills.
Grounds: Research shows that AP courses improve standardized test scores and college performance.
Backing: Studies from College Board demonstrate higher SAT scores and GPAs for students who take AP courses.
Warrant: Strong writing and analysis skills are important for students' future careers and education.
Rebuttal: Some students may not be prepared or interested in an advanced English course.
Qualifier: Requiring AP Language could better
Argument and disciplinarity
This document discusses different aspects of argumentation across disciplines. It provides examples of arguments from science, math, and humanities to illustrate disciplinary differences. It also addresses what counts as evidence and warrants in an argument depending on the field. Key common aspects discussed include what makes a good claim, how evidence is defined and evaluated, and the importance of explicitly stating warrants to strengthen an argument and avoid logical flaws.
Ld Debate Basics Novdec 2008
1) This document provides an overview of the basics of Lincoln-Douglas debate, including the structure of speeches and times.
2) It explains some key terms like affirmative, negative, constructive and rebuttal speeches. Constructive speeches aim to build an argument while rebuttals defend and attack positions.
3) The topic for November/December 2008 was presented: "In a democratic society, felons ought to retain the right to vote." It prompts defining terms like felon, democratic society, and right to outline the debate.
Chapter 5 fallacies
This document outlines and provides examples of common fallacies in arguments. It identifies two main categories of fallacies - those with irrelevant premises and those with unacceptable premises. Some specific fallacies discussed include genetic fallacy, composition, division, appeal to emotion, slippery slope, straw man, begging the question, false dilemma, and hasty generalization. Examples are provided for each fallacy.
Evaluation 4
The document summarizes the target audience for a thriller film. The target audience is expected to be individuals aged 15-25, female due to the main character being a strong independent woman, and working class because thrillers provide excitement at an affordable price. Research on other thriller films shows their target audiences also consist mainly of males aged 15-24 from middle socioeconomic classes.
Bbfc work
The document discusses the criteria used by the British Board of Film Classification to determine a film's rating, including violence, imitable behavior, and offensive language. It then explains that a film being discussed would receive a 15 rating due to its frequent violence involving the infliction of pain and injury through weapons and fight scenes, as well as a regular use of offensive language.
Questionnairefor media as
This document contains a questionnaire about preferences for thriller films. It includes both closed yes/no questions about genres, character vulnerabilities, and religious villain traits. It also has open-ended questions asking for definitions of thriller films, how they make the respondent feel, and if torture/gore relates to thrillers. Respondents are asked to provide as much detail as possible for the open-ended questions.
Recommended
Logos -toulmin
Here is a possible argument structure:
Claim: All students should be required to take AP Language in order to graduate.
Grounds: AP Language teaches important critical thinking and writing skills.
Reason: These skills are necessary for college and career success.
Backing: Employers value strong communication abilities. Research shows the cognitive benefits of advanced language courses.
Warrant: High school graduation requirements should ensure students are prepared for post-secondary education/work.
Rebuttal: Some students may not be ready for an AP-level course. Alternative options could also provide the same skills.
Qualifier: Requiring AP Language is reasonable but exceptions should be made for those who cannot succeed in that
Logos -toulmin
Here is a possible argument structure for the claim that all students should be required to take AP Language in order to graduate:
Claim: All students should be required to take AP Language in order to graduate.
Reason: Because it will improve their writing and critical thinking skills.
Grounds: Research shows that AP courses improve standardized test scores and college performance.
Backing: Studies from College Board demonstrate higher SAT scores and GPAs for students who take AP courses.
Warrant: Strong writing and analysis skills are important for students' future careers and education.
Rebuttal: Some students may not be prepared or interested in an advanced English course.
Qualifier: Requiring AP Language could better
Argument and disciplinarity
This document discusses different aspects of argumentation across disciplines. It provides examples of arguments from science, math, and humanities to illustrate disciplinary differences. It also addresses what counts as evidence and warrants in an argument depending on the field. Key common aspects discussed include what makes a good claim, how evidence is defined and evaluated, and the importance of explicitly stating warrants to strengthen an argument and avoid logical flaws.
Ld Debate Basics Novdec 2008
1) This document provides an overview of the basics of Lincoln-Douglas debate, including the structure of speeches and times.
2) It explains some key terms like affirmative, negative, constructive and rebuttal speeches. Constructive speeches aim to build an argument while rebuttals defend and attack positions.
3) The topic for November/December 2008 was presented: "In a democratic society, felons ought to retain the right to vote." It prompts defining terms like felon, democratic society, and right to outline the debate.
Chapter 5 fallacies
This document outlines and provides examples of common fallacies in arguments. It identifies two main categories of fallacies - those with irrelevant premises and those with unacceptable premises. Some specific fallacies discussed include genetic fallacy, composition, division, appeal to emotion, slippery slope, straw man, begging the question, false dilemma, and hasty generalization. Examples are provided for each fallacy.
Evaluation 4
The document summarizes the target audience for a thriller film. The target audience is expected to be individuals aged 15-25, female due to the main character being a strong independent woman, and working class because thrillers provide excitement at an affordable price. Research on other thriller films shows their target audiences also consist mainly of males aged 15-24 from middle socioeconomic classes.
Bbfc work
The document discusses the criteria used by the British Board of Film Classification to determine a film's rating, including violence, imitable behavior, and offensive language. It then explains that a film being discussed would receive a 15 rating due to its frequent violence involving the infliction of pain and injury through weapons and fight scenes, as well as a regular use of offensive language.
Questionnairefor media as
This document contains a questionnaire about preferences for thriller films. It includes both closed yes/no questions about genres, character vulnerabilities, and religious villain traits. It also has open-ended questions asking for definitions of thriller films, how they make the respondent feel, and if torture/gore relates to thrillers. Respondents are asked to provide as much detail as possible for the open-ended questions.
Enemy Prisoner Of War
The document provides instructions on searching and handling Enemy Prisoners of War (EPWs) according to the 5 S's:
1) Search/Segregate - EPWs should be searched from head to foot for information and segregated by rank, sex, and military association.
2) Silence - EPWs should be kept silent and unable to communicate through blindfolding, zip ties, or handkerchiefs over their mouths.
3) Separate - EPWs should be separated as quickly as possible from each other.
4) Safeguard - EPWs are entitled to safety and certain personal items like religious items, family pictures, and medical equipment while in custody.
Logos -toulmin
The document discusses the components of an argument, including claim, reason, warrant, backing, grounds, rebuttal, and qualifier. It explains that a claim is the assertion or conclusion being made, while the reason supports the claim. A warrant links the reason to the claim, and backing provides support for the warrant. Grounds further support the reason. A rebuttal states an opposing argument, and a qualifier indicates the degree of certainty in the claim. The document provides examples to illustrate how each component fits into an overall argument.
Epw Handling
The document outlines the proper procedures for handling Enemy Prisoners of War (EPWs), known as the "5S's and T". The 5S's are: Search, Silence, Segregate, Safeguard, and Speed. The T stands for Tag. Key steps include searching the EPW for weapons/intelligence, preventing communication, separating by rank/gender, protecting from harm, arranging quick transportation, and tagging the EPW with identifying information. The rights of EPWs are also summarized, which include humane treatment, communication, religious freedom, and not being punished for refusing certain questions.
Jim R Off-Duty Article
The document discusses the need for off-duty survival training for law enforcement officers. It notes that several officers in the author's department had been murdered at home, and that typical off-duty survival courses had been cut back or eliminated. The author and his partner realized they needed to create their own training to help protect officers and their families. The training covers blending in to avoid being identified as law enforcement off-duty, creating family safety plans, and being prepared for violent encounters even at home.
Questionnairefor media as
This document contains a questionnaire asking respondents about their preferences regarding thriller films. It includes both closed yes/no questions about genres, character vulnerabilities, and religious villain traits as well as open-ended questions asking for definitions and feelings about thrillers along with likes and dislikes of horror films. Respondents are asked to circle answers for the closed questions and provide details for the open-ended questions.
Identify and Reconstruct Arguments
The document discusses identifying and reconstructing arguments. It explains that arguments have premises and conclusions, and provides examples. It notes that indicator words like "since" and "because" can help identify premises and conclusions. However, relying solely on indicator words can sometimes be misleading. The document also discusses reconstructing arguments in standard form and dealing with missing or unstated premises in a way that balances charity and faithfulness.
General Questionnaire
This document is a questionnaire about thriller film preferences. It asks respondents about their film watching habits, how often they go to the cinema or rent/buy films. It also collects demographic information like age, gender and asks which thriller sub-genre and rated certificate they prefer. The final question asks for their favorite thriller film.
Language Part I
1. Ambiguity arises from words or phrases having multiple meanings, while vagueness arises from unclear cases of application of a term.
2. Arguments can equivocate by relying on ambiguous terms, while Sorites arguments illustrate problems that can arise from vagueness.
3. It is important to distinguish using language to talk about the world versus using language to talk about language itself (use versus mention). Failing to do so can lead to errors in arguments.
9 Logical Fallacies
The document outlines 9 common logical fallacies:
1. Over-generalization - Drawing too broad a conclusion from limited facts
2. Arguing in circles - Repeating an argument without evidence instead of supporting it
3. Black and white thinking - Presenting issues as having only two alternatives when more exist
4. Red herring - Introducing irrelevant topics to divert attention from the original issue
5. Loaded questions - Questions that assume unproven facts or opinions
6. Statistical fallacies - Misusing statistics to misrepresent rather than describe
7. Faulty causal relationship - Assuming correlation implies causation
8. Misleading comparisons - Inappropriately comparing different people or situations
9
Toulmin and Rogerian Arguments
The document discusses different argument structures including Toulmin and Rogerian schemes. It provides an overview of the key elements of a Toulmin argument including the claim, reason, warrant and proof. It then gives examples of how to apply Toulmin analysis to evaluate arguments on various topics. The document also summarizes the key aspects of a Rogerian argument which aims to find common ground rather than convince the opponent.
TRIAD Meeting 03/24/2014
This document outlines the rules, leadership, and upcoming events of the Transgender and Intersex Alliance of Denton (T.R.I.A.D.). It lists the officers, rules of the group including respecting people's privacy, and rights of members. Upcoming events include a logo design contest, craft night in April, and a clothing swap in May. It also provides information about gender identity, expression, and sexuality as well as etiquette for allies.
Vocabulary - Welcome Sections
This document contains vocabulary terms organized into four sections: A) personality adjectives, B) problems and friends, C) crimes and legal trouble, and D) television and anger. Section A lists adjectives like bossy, considerate, and ambitious. Section B describes problems, friends, and how to deal with problems. Section C covers crimes and legal consequences. Section D discusses television terminology and expressions of anger.
Bassham3 powerpoint lecturenotes_ch06
The document discusses several logical fallacies of insufficient evidence including:
1) Inappropriate appeal to authority, which occurs when an unreliable authority is cited.
2) Appeal to ignorance, which claims something is true just because it hasn't been proven false.
3) False alternatives, which insists there are fewer options than actually exist.
4) Loaded questions, which contain hidden assumptions that make it difficult to answer without appearing to endorse those assumptions.
Evaluation : Logical Fallacy (Insufficient Evidence)
This document discusses logical fallacies of insufficient evidence. It defines fallacies as arguments containing mistakes in reasoning. Specifically, it examines fallacies of insufficient evidence where premises do not provide enough support for the conclusion. Examples given include appeals to unqualified authority, ignorance, false alternatives, loaded questions, false causes, generalizations, slippery slopes, weak analogies, and inconsistencies. The document stresses that a fallacy does not necessarily mean the conclusion is false, only that the argument supporting it contains flawed reasoning.
Culture Beam Fair Tong
This document provides an introduction to different types of pop culture entertainment genres such as comedy films, fantasy films, action films, romantic films, science fiction films, and horror films. It also mentions historical films, cartoons, and various question words commonly used in the English language, including what, when, where, which, who, whom, whose, why, why don't, how, how many/much, and how old/come. The document is intended for students at the Matthayomsuksa 1 level and focuses on building vocabulary related to entertainment genres and question words.
My audience questionnaire
This document is a questionnaire for a film audience that asks respondents about their interests in various film genres including action, comedy, horror, musical, romance, sci-fi, and thriller. It requests demographic information and asks the audience to name recent and favorite films. The questionnaire also inquires about elements the audience finds interesting in different genres and what genres or films they like the least.
Mistakes in Reasoning
This document discusses different types of inductive arguments and fallacies in reasoning. It provides examples and analysis of several common fallacies, including hasty generalization, weak analogy, accident, post hoc, appeal to ignorance, ad hominem, and question begging. The key points are that memorizing fallacies is less useful than understanding the criteria to evaluate different types of arguments, and that some supposed fallacies are better understood as factual errors or criticisms rather than logical flaws.
Bassham3 powerpoint lecturenotes_ch05
The document defines logical fallacies and fallacies of relevance. It discusses several types of fallacies of relevance including personal attacks, attacking the motive, "look who's talking", scare tactics, appeals to pity, bandwagon arguments, straw man arguments, red herrings, equivocation, and begging the question. Each fallacy is explained with an example.
Certification
The document analyzes how a trailer follows the BBFC guidelines for a 15 certificate rating. It addresses the trailer's avoidance of discrimination, drug abuse, sadistic or sexualized horror. While the trailer features a character with an eating disorder and a murder by hanging, these are not glamorized. Strong language, nudity or sexual content are also absent. Violence is present but does not dwell on pain, injury or aftermath. Overall, the document determines the trailer is in compliance with the 15 rating restrictions.
Logic presentation(Informal Fallacies)
This document discusses different types of logical fallacies. It begins by defining logic and fallacies. There are two types of fallacies discussed - formal fallacies which can be identified by examining the structure of an argument, and informal fallacies which require examining the content. Several examples of informal fallacies are then described in detail, including appeals to force/pity, red herrings, hasty generalizations, straw man arguments, appeals to inappropriate authority, the fallacies of composition and division.
Toulmin model of argumentation
This document provides instructions for writing an argumentative essay using the Toulmin model. It explains the basic structure and components of the Toulmin model, including the introduction with a thesis statement, three body paragraphs with a position statement, claim, data, and warrant in each, and a conclusion. It also provides examples and gives guidance on developing claims, finding relevant data from credible sources to support claims, and writing warrants to link data to claims. The overall summary is that this document outlines the key elements and process for constructing an argumentative essay based on the Toulmin model of argumentation.
Structuring arguments
This document outlines the key elements of a Toulmin argument structure:
1) Claim - the main point or stance being argued
2) Reasons/Evidence - facts and data that support the claim
3) Warrants - underlying assumptions that logically connect the claim and evidence
4) Qualifiers - limits or exceptions placed on the claim
5) Backing - additional evidence and authority provided to support the warrants underlying the argument. The document provides examples and definitions for applying each element to construct a persuasive Toulmin argument.
More Related Content
What's hot
Enemy Prisoner Of War
The document provides instructions on searching and handling Enemy Prisoners of War (EPWs) according to the 5 S's:
1) Search/Segregate - EPWs should be searched from head to foot for information and segregated by rank, sex, and military association.
2) Silence - EPWs should be kept silent and unable to communicate through blindfolding, zip ties, or handkerchiefs over their mouths.
3) Separate - EPWs should be separated as quickly as possible from each other.
4) Safeguard - EPWs are entitled to safety and certain personal items like religious items, family pictures, and medical equipment while in custody.
Logos -toulmin
The document discusses the components of an argument, including claim, reason, warrant, backing, grounds, rebuttal, and qualifier. It explains that a claim is the assertion or conclusion being made, while the reason supports the claim. A warrant links the reason to the claim, and backing provides support for the warrant. Grounds further support the reason. A rebuttal states an opposing argument, and a qualifier indicates the degree of certainty in the claim. The document provides examples to illustrate how each component fits into an overall argument.
Epw Handling
The document outlines the proper procedures for handling Enemy Prisoners of War (EPWs), known as the "5S's and T". The 5S's are: Search, Silence, Segregate, Safeguard, and Speed. The T stands for Tag. Key steps include searching the EPW for weapons/intelligence, preventing communication, separating by rank/gender, protecting from harm, arranging quick transportation, and tagging the EPW with identifying information. The rights of EPWs are also summarized, which include humane treatment, communication, religious freedom, and not being punished for refusing certain questions.
Jim R Off-Duty Article
The document discusses the need for off-duty survival training for law enforcement officers. It notes that several officers in the author's department had been murdered at home, and that typical off-duty survival courses had been cut back or eliminated. The author and his partner realized they needed to create their own training to help protect officers and their families. The training covers blending in to avoid being identified as law enforcement off-duty, creating family safety plans, and being prepared for violent encounters even at home.
Questionnairefor media as
This document contains a questionnaire asking respondents about their preferences regarding thriller films. It includes both closed yes/no questions about genres, character vulnerabilities, and religious villain traits as well as open-ended questions asking for definitions and feelings about thrillers along with likes and dislikes of horror films. Respondents are asked to circle answers for the closed questions and provide details for the open-ended questions.
Identify and Reconstruct Arguments
The document discusses identifying and reconstructing arguments. It explains that arguments have premises and conclusions, and provides examples. It notes that indicator words like "since" and "because" can help identify premises and conclusions. However, relying solely on indicator words can sometimes be misleading. The document also discusses reconstructing arguments in standard form and dealing with missing or unstated premises in a way that balances charity and faithfulness.
General Questionnaire
This document is a questionnaire about thriller film preferences. It asks respondents about their film watching habits, how often they go to the cinema or rent/buy films. It also collects demographic information like age, gender and asks which thriller sub-genre and rated certificate they prefer. The final question asks for their favorite thriller film.
Language Part I
1. Ambiguity arises from words or phrases having multiple meanings, while vagueness arises from unclear cases of application of a term.
2. Arguments can equivocate by relying on ambiguous terms, while Sorites arguments illustrate problems that can arise from vagueness.
3. It is important to distinguish using language to talk about the world versus using language to talk about language itself (use versus mention). Failing to do so can lead to errors in arguments.
9 Logical Fallacies
The document outlines 9 common logical fallacies:
1. Over-generalization - Drawing too broad a conclusion from limited facts
2. Arguing in circles - Repeating an argument without evidence instead of supporting it
3. Black and white thinking - Presenting issues as having only two alternatives when more exist
4. Red herring - Introducing irrelevant topics to divert attention from the original issue
5. Loaded questions - Questions that assume unproven facts or opinions
6. Statistical fallacies - Misusing statistics to misrepresent rather than describe
7. Faulty causal relationship - Assuming correlation implies causation
8. Misleading comparisons - Inappropriately comparing different people or situations
9
Toulmin and Rogerian Arguments
The document discusses different argument structures including Toulmin and Rogerian schemes. It provides an overview of the key elements of a Toulmin argument including the claim, reason, warrant and proof. It then gives examples of how to apply Toulmin analysis to evaluate arguments on various topics. The document also summarizes the key aspects of a Rogerian argument which aims to find common ground rather than convince the opponent.
TRIAD Meeting 03/24/2014
This document outlines the rules, leadership, and upcoming events of the Transgender and Intersex Alliance of Denton (T.R.I.A.D.). It lists the officers, rules of the group including respecting people's privacy, and rights of members. Upcoming events include a logo design contest, craft night in April, and a clothing swap in May. It also provides information about gender identity, expression, and sexuality as well as etiquette for allies.
Vocabulary - Welcome Sections
This document contains vocabulary terms organized into four sections: A) personality adjectives, B) problems and friends, C) crimes and legal trouble, and D) television and anger. Section A lists adjectives like bossy, considerate, and ambitious. Section B describes problems, friends, and how to deal with problems. Section C covers crimes and legal consequences. Section D discusses television terminology and expressions of anger.
Bassham3 powerpoint lecturenotes_ch06
The document discusses several logical fallacies of insufficient evidence including:
1) Inappropriate appeal to authority, which occurs when an unreliable authority is cited.
2) Appeal to ignorance, which claims something is true just because it hasn't been proven false.
3) False alternatives, which insists there are fewer options than actually exist.
4) Loaded questions, which contain hidden assumptions that make it difficult to answer without appearing to endorse those assumptions.
Evaluation : Logical Fallacy (Insufficient Evidence)
This document discusses logical fallacies of insufficient evidence. It defines fallacies as arguments containing mistakes in reasoning. Specifically, it examines fallacies of insufficient evidence where premises do not provide enough support for the conclusion. Examples given include appeals to unqualified authority, ignorance, false alternatives, loaded questions, false causes, generalizations, slippery slopes, weak analogies, and inconsistencies. The document stresses that a fallacy does not necessarily mean the conclusion is false, only that the argument supporting it contains flawed reasoning.
Culture Beam Fair Tong
This document provides an introduction to different types of pop culture entertainment genres such as comedy films, fantasy films, action films, romantic films, science fiction films, and horror films. It also mentions historical films, cartoons, and various question words commonly used in the English language, including what, when, where, which, who, whom, whose, why, why don't, how, how many/much, and how old/come. The document is intended for students at the Matthayomsuksa 1 level and focuses on building vocabulary related to entertainment genres and question words.
My audience questionnaire
This document is a questionnaire for a film audience that asks respondents about their interests in various film genres including action, comedy, horror, musical, romance, sci-fi, and thriller. It requests demographic information and asks the audience to name recent and favorite films. The questionnaire also inquires about elements the audience finds interesting in different genres and what genres or films they like the least.
Mistakes in Reasoning
This document discusses different types of inductive arguments and fallacies in reasoning. It provides examples and analysis of several common fallacies, including hasty generalization, weak analogy, accident, post hoc, appeal to ignorance, ad hominem, and question begging. The key points are that memorizing fallacies is less useful than understanding the criteria to evaluate different types of arguments, and that some supposed fallacies are better understood as factual errors or criticisms rather than logical flaws.
Bassham3 powerpoint lecturenotes_ch05
The document defines logical fallacies and fallacies of relevance. It discusses several types of fallacies of relevance including personal attacks, attacking the motive, "look who's talking", scare tactics, appeals to pity, bandwagon arguments, straw man arguments, red herrings, equivocation, and begging the question. Each fallacy is explained with an example.
Certification
The document analyzes how a trailer follows the BBFC guidelines for a 15 certificate rating. It addresses the trailer's avoidance of discrimination, drug abuse, sadistic or sexualized horror. While the trailer features a character with an eating disorder and a murder by hanging, these are not glamorized. Strong language, nudity or sexual content are also absent. Violence is present but does not dwell on pain, injury or aftermath. Overall, the document determines the trailer is in compliance with the 15 rating restrictions.
Logic presentation(Informal Fallacies)
This document discusses different types of logical fallacies. It begins by defining logic and fallacies. There are two types of fallacies discussed - formal fallacies which can be identified by examining the structure of an argument, and informal fallacies which require examining the content. Several examples of informal fallacies are then described in detail, including appeals to force/pity, red herrings, hasty generalizations, straw man arguments, appeals to inappropriate authority, the fallacies of composition and division.
What's hot (20)
Evaluation : Logical Fallacy (Insufficient Evidence)
Evaluation : Logical Fallacy (Insufficient Evidence)
ย
Viewers also liked
Toulmin model of argumentation
This document provides instructions for writing an argumentative essay using the Toulmin model. It explains the basic structure and components of the Toulmin model, including the introduction with a thesis statement, three body paragraphs with a position statement, claim, data, and warrant in each, and a conclusion. It also provides examples and gives guidance on developing claims, finding relevant data from credible sources to support claims, and writing warrants to link data to claims. The overall summary is that this document outlines the key elements and process for constructing an argumentative essay based on the Toulmin model of argumentation.
Structuring arguments
This document outlines the key elements of a Toulmin argument structure:
1) Claim - the main point or stance being argued
2) Reasons/Evidence - facts and data that support the claim
3) Warrants - underlying assumptions that logically connect the claim and evidence
4) Qualifiers - limits or exceptions placed on the claim
5) Backing - additional evidence and authority provided to support the warrants underlying the argument. The document provides examples and definitions for applying each element to construct a persuasive Toulmin argument.
Toulmin argument
The document outlines Stephen Toulmin's model of persuasive argument, which includes a claim, grounds, and warrant. The claim is the statement being argued, grounds provide data and facts to support the claim, and the warrant links the grounds to the claim to validate why the data supports it. Successful arguments also include backing, qualifiers, rebuttals, and reservations to strengthen the core claim, grounds, and warrant components of the argument.
Toulmin model5
The document outlines Toulmin's model for evaluating arguments, which identifies six key parts of an argument: grounds, warrant, claim, backing, reservation, and qualifier. It explains each part and provides examples. Toulmin's model breaks down arguments into their basic components to analyze how tightly constructed and reasonable they are. The model helps show how each part relates to the overall validity of an argument but is not meant to judge the success of proving an argument.
Toulmin presentation
This document discusses Stephen Toulmin's modern argument model from the 1950s. [1] It focuses on informal logic and probability rather than certainty. [2] The model has seven components: claim, data, warrant, backing, rebuttal, qualifier, and grounds. [3] The enthymeme outlines the core components of claim (main point), data (evidence/reasons), and warrant (unstated assumption connecting data and claim).
What is toulmin
The document discusses the Toulmin method of argumentation, which was developed by British philosopher Stephen Toulmin. The Toulmin model examines arguments through claim, data, and warrant. It aims to describe how people make reasonable arguments in real-life situations, where qualifications are often needed. The model breaks down an argument into a claim supported by data, with the warrant justifying why the data supports the claim. It provides a practical tool for understanding and constructing arguments.
Catalina Island Garibaldi Research
The document summarizes an experiment where students investigated how male Garibaldi fish react to objects of different colors that approach their nests. They observed male Garibaldis at three different nest locations. At each location, they recorded the fish's response (no response, minimal response, or attack) to objects of three different colors (orange, mixed orange, and non-orange) approaching the nest. They found the fish were most likely to attack an object that was solid orange.
Ming's pet peeve
Ming has a strong aversion to being woken up in the morning and will react violently if woken without consent. The document warns that Ming cannot be bothered during sleep and cautions viewers about graphic violence that may follow if one attempts to wake Ming. It emphasizes that life is important and advises people to never try waking Ming up.
Speech EC
This document discusses argumentation and persuasive techniques. It defines different types of arguments as destructive or constructive. It also outlines key components of arguments including claims, types of proof, and responsibilities in arguments. Finally, it explains Stephen Toulmin's model of argument which identifies six key aspects: grounds, warrant, claim, backing, reservations, and qualifiers.
The argumentative environment-1
The document discusses the three pillars of persuasion according to Aristotle: logos, pathos, and ethos. Logos appeals to logic through factual evidence. Pathos appeals to emotions by evoking feelings in the listener. Ethos establishes the speaker's credibility and expertise. The document also provides examples of each and explains the Toulmin model for analyzing arguments.
Structuring a written argument 1213 copy
The passage discusses the debate between whether life was better for hunter-gatherers or farmers. It notes that while hunter-gatherers had more leisure time and did not have to work as hard as farmers, they were also more vulnerable to food shortages and famines. Farming allowed communities to support larger populations, but farmers had to work harder and longer hours to grow enough food. Overall, there are good arguments on both sides, and reasonable people can disagree on which lifestyle was ultimately better.
Familiar strange challenge 1213
The document describes an assignment for students to analyze cultural features of Americans by "making the familiar strange". Students are asked to choose a common American cultural practice, find an image to illustrate it, and describe the practice objectively as if observing an unfamiliar culture. The goal is to analyze familiar cultural practices in a way that makes them seem strange or unfamiliar in order to better understand and explain them to others. Students who can most effectively analyze a cultural trait this way may earn extra credit.
Toulmin model
The document introduces Toulmin's model of argumentation, which breaks down arguments into six concepts: data, claim, warrant, backing, qualifiers, and exceptions. It explains that Toulmin's model can be used to analyze and plan argumentative writing by identifying the key components of an argument. The document also provides two citations as examples of resources on Toulmin's model and argumentative techniques.
The Argument
This document provides an overview of the key components of an argumentative essay, including stating claims, providing evidence, making appeals, identifying assumptions, and using different types of reasoning. It discusses how arguments aim to engage the reader's powers of reasoning to win agreement with an assertion, while persuasion also aims to influence actions by engaging beliefs and feelings. The document emphasizes using accurate, representative, relevant and adequate evidence to support claims, and being willing to address alternative views to strengthen the argument.
Toulmin
The document discusses constructing arguments using Toulmin style. It provides examples of enthymemes arguing that a Geo Metro, Volvo, or Ford Falcon should be bought based on economy, safety, or color. It then explains the Toulmin model terminology of claim, reason, warrant, backing, and assumption and applies it to the Volvo example.
Quote sandwiches
This slideshow introduces one method for turning the three central structures of Toulmin argumentation--claims, evidence, and warrants--into paragraphs, through a structure called a "Quote Sandwich"--an intro, quote, and analysis.
Toulmin Model
The Toulmin Model of Argument is a method for analyzing arguments that breaks them down into six key parts: claim, grounds, warrant, backing, reservations/rebuttal, and qualifier. The model was developed by Stephen Toulmin to help understand how constructed arguments are and how each part relates to the overall validity. It examines the claim being made, the evidence or grounds given for the claim, the warrant connecting the grounds to the claim, any backing for the warrant, potential exceptions or rebuttals, and qualifiers regarding the strength of the claim. The overall goal of the Toulmin Model is to effectively analyze the how and why of an argument by dividing it into its constituent logical elements.
Types of Argument and Toulmin Analysis
A brief overview of the Classical Oration model and Toulmin Argumentation, from chapters 1 and 7 of Everything's an Argument
The Toulmin Model of Argument
The document discusses the Toulmin model of argument which is a systematic approach to reasoning that also considers the ethical basis of an argument. It outlines the key components of a Toulmin argument including the claim, data to support the claim, warrant to link the data to the claim, backing for the warrant, qualifiers to limit the claim, and potential rebuttals. It provides examples of applying these components and an outline for writing a Toulmin essay.
Toulmin Argumentation
The document discusses arguments for parents to stop surveilling their children electronically and trust them more. It provides facts that the technologies used to monitor children have not proven to reduce delinquency or destructive behaviors. Additionally, a survey found that many teenagers would feel betrayed if their parents tracked their location on their phone. However, it is acknowledged that parents have a right to know their children's whereabouts to some degree. The document lays out an argument following a Toulmin model of argumentation.
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to Logos -toulmin.revised
Lecture 2 arguments
This document provides an introduction to critical thinking and argumentation. It discusses key elements of arguments such as claims, grounds, warrants, backing, and qualifiers. It also introduces argument mapping as a tool to visualize the logical structure of arguments. Additionally, it discusses Stephen Toulmin's model of argument which identifies the core components of arguments and their interrelationships. The document uses examples to illustrate different types of arguments and their structures.
Logical Fallacies Slide Show
This document discusses logical arguments and fallacies. It provides examples of different types of arguments including identifying the conclusion, reasons/evidence, and assumptions. It then explains common logical fallacies such as appeals to authority, slippery slopes, strawman arguments, and false causes. The document cautions that correlation does not necessarily imply causation and uses examples to illustrate this point.
Fallacies 4.1 Fallacies Questions 0 of 5 complete (0) 0 of 1.docx
Fallacies / 4.1 Fallacies Questions: 0 of 5 complete (0%) | 0 of 1 correct (0%)
Fallacies
There are many different ways our reasoning can be flawed, but some of these mistakes are so common that they have names. This chapter explores fallacies, inhabitants of the often ridiculous but not always obvious world of flawed reasoning.
A fallacy is a type of flawed reasoning, while a fallacious argument is an argument that commits a fallacy. There are two great reasons to study fallacies: to prevent yourself from being fooled by them, and to prevent yourself from committing them unintentionally.
Ground Rules
ยท Fallacies can be found in both deductive and inductive arguments.
ยท Fallacies can seem very plausible and, when undetected, are often persuasive.
ยท The presence of a fallacy doesn't necessarily mean the conclusion is false. It just means that the logic is flawed and so the argument isn't compelling.
Tips for Spotting Fallacies
ยท Become familiar with the common ones.
ยท Evaluate assumptions in an argument.
ยท Find the conclusion, and then ask yourself if the premises are relevant to it.
ยท Look for things in the argument that distract your attention from the main point.
Common Fallacies
For the rest of the chapter we are going to explore 12 of the most common fallacies.
1. Red herring: fallacy in which the arguer raises an irrelevant side issue to distract the opponent or audience from what is really at stake.
I don't know why you're arguing that working a full day on Saturday drains you and makes you less productive in the work week. You should consider yourself lucky... before there were unions, factory laborers would have to work 14 hours a day for six days a week!
Bringing up the conditions of factory workers in pre-union days is mostly irrelevant to the opponent's main point that a full day of work on Saturday reduces productivity for the following week.
2. Appeal to popularity: fallacy in which the arguer attempts to bolster his or her argument by mentioning that "everybody" (or a large group of people) shares the same belief, preference, or habit.
Diane, getting an iPhone will make your life better. I mean, look aroundโpractically everyone in America has an iPhone by this point!
The fact that millions of people own iPhones is not a logically sound reason to believe that buying one will make Diane's life better.
3. Post hoc ergo propter hoc: fallacy in which the arguer assumes that because there is a correlation between two events (i.e., one preceded the other), then the first must have caused the second. The phrase is Latin for "after this, therefore because of this."
In the years after nutrition facts were added to food packaging, obesity rates in the United States rose higher than ever before. Therefore, listing nutrition facts causes people to get fatter.
Just because the rise in obesity rates happened to coincide with the new practice of listing nutrition facts, no logical reason is offered as to why one might have caused the other.
4. ...
7. Fallacies.pptx
This document provides information about logical fallacies and common types of flawed reasoning in arguments. It discusses two main categories of fallacies: fallacies of relevance, where the premises are irrelevant to the conclusion, and fallacies of insufficient evidence, where the premises fail to sufficiently support the conclusion. Specific fallacies explained include personal attacks, straw man, appeal to emotion, false authority, hasty generalization, slippery slope, and inconsistency. The document emphasizes identifying faulty patterns of reasoning and assessing whether evidence and comparisons are appropriate to draw the stated conclusion.
Q2_opinion_truth.pptx
This document discusses various methods and concepts for distinguishing opinions from facts and truth, including:
1. Activities that analyze statements as either facts or opinions, and determine truth through senses, facts, consensus, or documentation.
2. Key terms like arguments, fallacies, biases that can influence opinions. Logic, fallacies like appeals and biases must be considered when evaluating arguments.
3. Philosophical methods like the Socratic method, scientific method, and historical method can be used to determine truth from opinions in different situations. Understanding the difference between opinions and truth can guide us to wisdom in evaluating varied views and making wise decisions.
Example Of A Good Expositor. Online assignment writing service.
The document provides instructions for requesting and completing an assignment writing request on the HelpWriting.net platform. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with a password and email. 2) Complete a 10-minute order form providing instructions, sources, and deadline. 3) Review bids from writers and select one. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment if satisfied. 5) Request revisions to ensure satisfaction, with a full refund option for plagiarized work. The process aims to match clients with qualified writers to fully meet their needs for original, high-quality content.
Reason Continued
The document discusses different types of logic, including deductive and inductive reasoning. It notes that deductive reasoning is more certain but less informative than inductive reasoning. It also discusses what distinguishes good generalizations from bad ones, including considering number and variety of examples, exceptions, coherence, and subject area. The document describes how logic can help get closer to truth when premises are true and arguments are valid, but gives examples of when conclusions could be tentatively accepted. It also discusses common fallacies in reasoning such as post hoc, ad hominem, circular reasoning, equivocation, and false dilemmas.
Topic 2. methods of philosophical reasoning
This document discusses philosophical methods of reasoning and fallacies. It defines fallacies as flawed arguments. The document then provides examples of different types of fallacies, including fallacies of relevance, weak induction, presumption, ambiguity, and grammatical analogy. Specific fallacies discussed include appeal to force, pity, popularity, ignorance, and false analogy. The document encourages analyzing arguments to identify fallacious reasoning.
Why are we doing this again1) Generally speaking,.docx
This document discusses reasoning and fallacies. It begins by stating that the purpose of the class is to make students better at reasoning by learning to recognize fallacies. It then provides examples of different types of fallacies, such as hasty generalization, generalization from exceptional cases, slippery slopes, false causes, appeals to authority and popularity, and irrelevant conclusions. It also discusses factors that can influence credibility, such as expertise, bias, prior knowledge, plausibility, interested vs disinterested parties, and media sources. Throughout, it gives examples to illustrate each fallacy and concept.
Fallacies
The document provides information about different types of logical fallacies, including fallacies of relevance and fallacies of insufficient evidence. It defines what a fallacy is, and categorizes them into two types - fallacies of relevance and fallacies of insufficient evidence. For fallacies of relevance, it gives examples and explanations of different types like personal attack, attacking the motive, look who's talking, two wrongs make a right, scare tactics, appeal to emotion, bandwagon argument, straw man, red herring, equivocation, and begging the question. For fallacies of insufficient evidence, it discusses false authority, appeal to ignorance, false dilemma, loaded question, false cause, hasty generalization, slippery slope, weak analogy
Understanding arguments
The slides aim to train members of Ateneo Debate Union to detect fallacies in argumentation. It is the hope that this would enhance their case construction skills. The principles used borrows heavily from logic.
Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource
The document discusses the legal defense of self-defense. It outlines the two elements required: [1] the use of force must be justified based on an honest and reasonable belief of an imminent attack; a mistaken belief may still be considered. [2] The force used must be reasonable and proportionate to the perceived threat; excessive force will cause the defense to fail. A case study is presented involving a woman who shoots and kills a man she believes intends to rape her at knife-point; factors like her genuine fear and his reputation for violence may justify her initial use of force, but repeatedly shooting him likely made the force excessive.
Fallacies.ppt
This document contains information about logical fallacies presented in a module on critical thinking. It defines what a fallacy is and divides them into two categories: fallacies of relevance and fallacies of insufficient evidence. For fallacies of relevance, it provides examples and definitions of 11 different types including personal attack, attacking the motive, look who's talking, two wrongs make a right, and straw man. For fallacies of insufficient evidence, it defines 8 types such as inappropriate appeal to authority, questionable cause, hasty generalization, and inconsistency. The document concludes with an activity where students construct fallacious arguments in groups.
Fallacies (2).pdf
The document discusses various types of logical fallacies, which are flaws in reasoning that can undermine arguments. It defines fallacies as violations of logical laws or erroneous forms of reasoning. The document then explains 12 common informal fallacies, including appeals to emotion, authority, popularity and ignorance. It provides examples to illustrate each fallacy. The document concludes by presenting statements containing potential fallacies and asking the reader to identify them, along with answering any additional questions.
Dean r berry fallacy straw man
This document provides an overview of the straw man fallacy through examples and explanations. It begins by defining a straw man fallacy as misrepresenting an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack. It then provides several examples to illustrate how an argument commits this fallacy by replacing the actual position with a distorted version to argue against. The document aims to help readers identify straw man arguments and understand this common logical fallacy.
Lesson three: Argumentation
The Debate in the Neighbourhood mentor training programme provides all of the material that you need to begin exploring debate with teaching staff and youth workers in your institution or youth group.
Tilbury House Newcomer Workshop BPS Debating
This document provides an overview of the contents and theories that will be covered in a newcomer workshop on debating at Tilbury House. It discusses argumentation theory, including types of bad arguments to avoid such as personal attacks, appeals to authority, false analogies, assertions without evidence, extremism, misrepresentations, and logical fallacies. It outlines good argument structures and emphasizes explaining arguments clearly. It also covers preparing for debates by understanding motions, roles, and engaging with opponents. Recurring debate principles are discussed, such as balancing privacy vs. security, free markets vs. intervention, and liberty vs. paternalism. Finally, it lists upcoming international debating tournaments.
Fallacies
This document defines and provides examples of various types of formal and informal fallacies. Formal fallacies are errors in reasoning based on logical form, while informal fallacies occur in everyday discourse. Some fallacies can be unintentional, but others are intentional ways to deceive people. The document then outlines specific fallacies such as fallacies of ambiguity involving unclear meanings, fallacies of relevance using irrelevant premises or conclusions, fallacies of presumption making unjustified assumptions, and fallacies of indefinite induction drawing conclusions from insufficient samples. Examples are provided for each fallacy type.
Logical fallacies
This document discusses logical fallacies and how to identify them. It defines and provides examples of common fallacies such as hasty generalization, missing the point, post hoc, slippery slope, weak analogy, appeal to authority, ad populum, ad hominem, appeal to pity, appeal to ignorance, straw man, red herring, false dichotomy, begging the question, and equivocation. It encourages readers to ask questions to determine if an argument relies on one of these fallacious techniques rather than sound logic.
Fallacies of Rebuttal: Fallacies of counter-evidence, Ad Hominem, and of Dive...
This document defines and provides examples of various logical fallacies related to rebutting arguments. It discusses fallacies of denying, ignoring, or trivializing counterevidence. It also examines ad hominem fallacies involving personal attacks or irrelevant personal characteristics of a speaker. Additionally, it outlines fallacies of diversion where the discussion is shifted to irrelevant side issues or misrepresentations to avoid the original topic.
Similar to Logos -toulmin.revised (20)
Fallacies 4.1 Fallacies Questions 0 of 5 complete (0) 0 of 1.docx
Fallacies 4.1 Fallacies Questions 0 of 5 complete (0) 0 of 1.docx
ย
Example Of A Good Expositor. Online assignment writing service.
Example Of A Good Expositor. Online assignment writing service.
ย
Why are we doing this again1) Generally speaking,.docx
Why are we doing this again1) Generally speaking,.docx
ย
Fallacies of Rebuttal: Fallacies of counter-evidence, Ad Hominem, and of Dive...
Fallacies of Rebuttal: Fallacies of counter-evidence, Ad Hominem, and of Dive...
ย
More from nstearns
Bridges Resumes.pdf
The document discusses general principles for creating visually appealing documents, including making your name big, using blocks of color, and separating headings from text. It recommends using design software like Canva or Pages to apply these principles when making a resume.
Intro to AP Sem and Lang 2022.pdf
This document discusses combining an AP Language and Composition class with an AP Seminar class into a single course. It notes that both classes focus on creating strong arguments and learning how to find and assess the truth. The combined course would prepare students to take both the AP Language and AP Seminar exams. It would require students to complete the requirements for both classes, including group and individual projects and presentations for Seminar, and essays and multiple choice for Language. The goals are for students to learn how to make convincing arguments, understand different perspectives on issues, and earn college credits through their exam scores. Policies for the combined class are also outlined.
Intro to ap sem and lang
This document discusses combining AP Language and Composition with AP Seminar into a single class. It would require students to complete the requirements for both AP exams, including essays, presentations, and research for two yearlong projects. The goal is for students to learn how to create strong arguments, think critically about issues, and resist manipulation. Completing both AP classes would provide skills in research, argumentation, and collaboration that are part of the AP Capstone diploma program. The schedule outlines working on group and individual projects throughout the school year and completing exams and portfolios in May and June.
Bridges 6 traits intro
This document discusses using the "Six Traits + 1" framework to evaluate writing skills. It breaks down writing into six traits: Ideas, Voice, Sentence Fluency, Word Choice, Organization, and Conventions. An additional trait of Research is included. Examples are provided for each trait to illustrate strengths and weaknesses. The framework can be used to assess writing on a scale of 1 to 10 for each trait in order to identify areas to improve.
Claims4
The document outlines 6 types of arguments: 1) categorical arguments that determine if something is or isn't, 2) definitional arguments where the definition is contested, 3) cause/consequence arguments about what causes what, 4) metaphor arguments that compare things, 5) evaluation arguments about what is good or bad, and 6) proposal arguments about what should be done. It then provides examples that name the type of argument for various claims about steroid use, toy factories, college athletes, and 9/11.
Intro to ap sem and lang
This document discusses two Advanced Placement courses that combine multiple subjects: AP Language and Composition, which combines composition and rhetoric, and AP Seminar, which combines research skills and argumentation. For AP Lang, the exam consists of synthesis, argument, and rhetorical analysis essays along with multiple choice questions. AP Seminar involves a group and individual research project, presentation, and report, as well as an exam assessing understanding and making arguments. The document suggests taking these courses as part of the AP Capstone program, which provides a certificate for students who pass the AP Seminar and Research exams along with four other AP exams.
Line of reasoning 2
This document provides information on how to identify the key components of an argument, including the claim, reasons, and evidence. It defines an argument as having a claim, reasons to support the claim, and evidence to back up the reasons. It then provides examples of different arguments, outlining the claim, reasons, and evidence in each.
Intro to ap sem and lang
This document discusses two Advanced Placement classes that are combined into one: AP Seminar and AP Research. Students in this combined AP Capstone program must take AP Seminar, which involves a group project, individual project, and a small multiple choice and essay exam. They must also take AP Research, which involves an academic thesis paper and presentation with an interview. Completing both of these classes along with four other AP classes can provide college credit and other benefits for students.
Guided rhetorical analysis of 2008 q2 prompt
This document provides guidance on how to write a successful rhetorical analysis essay for the AP English Language and Composition exam. It explains that the essay requires analyzing the rhetorical choices a writer makes to convey an argument, purpose, or message. Students should explain what the writer says, how the writer says it, and why the rhetorical choices are effective. The document offers tips for close reading, understanding the prompt, outlining an essay, and writing a draft within the time limit. It provides examples of body paragraphs and encourages students to reflect on their work.
Arg prompt class
The prompt examines H.L. Mencken's claim that the average person values safety over freedom and asks students to argue how much this applies to contemporary society. It warns against misunderstanding the prompt, missing its focus on contemporary issues, and making an argument that is too simplistic. It provides examples of thesis statements that could fully agree, disagree, or qualify Mencken's view and suggests an evidence-first or thesis-first approach to planning the essay. Possible evidence mentioned includes references to the Patriot Act, volunteering for war, sacrificing for family, and thrill-seeking behaviors.
Arg prompt class
The document provides a prompt for an AP argument essay about a quote by H.L. Mencken that "The average man does not want to be free. He simply wants to be safe." Students are asked to examine how much this observation applies to contemporary society and support their position with evidence. The document discusses understanding the quote and prompt, boiling it down to a choice between risking safety for freedom or giving up freedom for safety. It warns of potential pitfalls in misunderstanding or oversimplifying the prompt. It presents options of planning evidence first then thesis or thesis first then evidence, and provides examples of potential thesis statements agreeing, disagreeing, or qualifying Mencken's view, as well as potential pieces of evidence
Ted talk script org
This document provides guidance for creating an effective TED Talk presentation. It recommends that talks be 6-8 minutes long, use a slideshow to enhance the discussion, and offer a clear argument or new perspective. Talks should be based on research and cite sources. The presentation style should be engaging with strong eye contact and body language. It suggests organizing the talk using Monroe's Motivational Sequence: get attention, establish need or want, provide satisfaction or solution, help the audience visualize benefits, and encourage action. An example is provided that follows this structure by opening with a personal story, discussing problems reading can solve, giving examples, showing pictures, and suggesting ways for the audience to read more. Various formats like a listicle
Making the case
This document provides guidance on organizing persuasive arguments using classical rhetorical structures or modern marketing approaches. It discusses gathering an audience's attention, providing context, outlining an argument's thesis and parts, making and supporting claims, refuting counterarguments, and closing with a compelling appeal. An example debate topic on nuclear weapons possession is used to illustrate how to plan an argument by identifying knowledge gaps, structuring an outline with classical elements, and determining the most persuasive reasons and evidence for the intended audience. The key is to understand an audience and frame an argument in a way that convinces others they already agree with one's position.
Visualizing arguments
The document outlines an argument that it is wasteful for the city of Chicago to destroy confiscated weapons. The argument claims that the confiscated weapons, estimated to be worth $2 million, could provide funds for the city's needs rather than being destroyed. Evidence includes that the city already sells other confiscated contraband. The argument acknowledges the common belief in Chicago that more guns lead to more violence, but notes that nationally crime rates have declined as gun ownership has increased, suggesting guns in lawful citizens' hands may not cause increased harm.
What it says.what it does
Lincoln recalls the founding of the United States based on principles of liberty and equality. He refers to the ongoing Civil War and how its outcome will determine whether a nation founded on these principles can long endure. Lincoln cites the battle at Gettysburg as the reason for dedicating a memorial to those who died there defending these founding principles of the nation.
Ideas in writing 2019
The document provides tips for effective writing. It emphasizes using concrete examples, sensory details, metaphors, and stories to show rather than just tell. Allusions and references should be understandable to the intended audience. The creative process takes time and may involve preparation, incubation of ideas, illumination of solutions, and verification. Overall it stresses showing ideas vividly through specific examples, descriptions, and comparisons rather than vague statements to improve writing.
Evidence on q3
This document provides guidance and examples for writing high-scoring responses on the AP English Language and Composition exam. It discusses the importance of including evidence and commentary in arguments. It provides examples of introductions and body paragraphs from 4-point scored responses. It also includes prompts for students to practice developing their own arguments and evidence, including brainstorming counterarguments and writing an introduction and body paragraph.
Emotional argumentation 2019
This document discusses different rhetorical strategies for emotional argumentation, including appeals to emotion, framing, and rhetorical figures. It provides examples of different types of appeals to emotion such as appeals to hope, fear, pity, guilt, ridicule, disgust, consequences, flattery, and spite. It also discusses conceptual metaphors, framing devices, and rhetorical figures like repetition figures, antithesis, tricolon, chiasmus, and paralipsis that can be used to emotionally engage an audience.
English 12 intro
This document outlines the curriculum and expectations for a 12th grade English class. The class is divided into 4 quarters, with each quarter focusing on different skills like reading, writing, speaking, and humanities. For quarter one, students will do independent reading, reflective essays, and learn about philosophy. Quarters two through four will cover dystopian literature, creative writing, research papers, public speaking, and analyzing plays and philosophy. The document also lists class expectations around grading, supplies, cellphone policy, and how students and the teacher should treat each other with respect.
Rhetoric intro 2019
This document provides a brief history of rhetoric and discusses its origins in ancient Greece. It notes that rhetoric referred to public speaking and involves persuading others. It mentions important early rhetoricians like Tisias and Corax in Sicily and Aristotle, who wrote about the rhetorical triangle of logos, ethos, and pathos. The document then provides four examples of situations and asks the reader to analyze them according to the rhetorical triangle.
More from nstearns (20)
Recently uploaded
Andreas Schleicher presents PISA 2022 Volume III - Creative Thinking - 18 Jun...
Andreas Schleicher, Director of Education and Skills at the OECD presents at the launch of PISA 2022 Volume III - Creative Minds, Creative Schools on 18 June 2024.
How Barcodes Can Be Leveraged Within Odoo 17
In this presentation, we will explore how barcodes can be leveraged within Odoo 17 to streamline our manufacturing processes. We will cover the configuration steps, how to utilize barcodes in different manufacturing scenarios, and the overall benefits of implementing this technology.
Stack Memory Organization of 8086 Microprocessor
The stack memory organization of 8086 microprocessor.
Philippine Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan (EPP) Curriculum
(๐๐๐ ๐๐๐) (๐๐๐ฌ๐ฌ๐จ๐ง ๐)-๐๐ซ๐๐ฅ๐ข๐ฆ๐ฌ
๐๐ข๐ฌ๐๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ฌ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐ฎ๐ซ๐ซ๐ข๐๐ฎ๐ฅ๐ฎ๐ฆ ๐ข๐ง ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐ก๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฉ๐ฉ๐ข๐ง๐๐ฌ:
- Understand the goals and objectives of the Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan (EPP) curriculum, recognizing its importance in fostering practical life skills and values among students. Students will also be able to identify the key components and subjects covered, such as agriculture, home economics, industrial arts, and information and communication technology.
๐๐ฑ๐ฉ๐ฅ๐๐ข๐ง ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐ญ๐ฎ๐ซ๐ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ ๐จ๐ ๐๐ง ๐๐ง๐ญ๐ซ๐๐ฉ๐ซ๐๐ง๐๐ฎ๐ซ:
-Define entrepreneurship, distinguishing it from general business activities by emphasizing its focus on innovation, risk-taking, and value creation. Students will describe the characteristics and traits of successful entrepreneurs, including their roles and responsibilities, and discuss the broader economic and social impacts of entrepreneurial activities on both local and global scales.
BรI TแบฌP Dแบ Y THรM TIแบพNG ANH LแปP 7 Cแบข NฤM FRIENDS PLUS SรCH CHรN TRแปI SรNG Tแบ O ...
BรI TแบฌP Dแบ Y THรM TIแบพNG ANH LแปP 7 Cแบข NฤM FRIENDS PLUS SรCH CHรN TRแปI SรNG Tแบ O ...Nguyen Thanh Tu Collection
https://app.box.com/s/qhtvq32h4ybf9t49ku85x0n3xl4jhr15ย
skeleton System.pdf (skeleton system wow)
๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ
โ โุฅุถุบ ุจูู ุฅูุฏููู
โู
ู ุฃููู ุงูู
ูุงุฒู
ุงูุชู ุตู
ู
ุชูุง
ู
ูุฒู
ุฉ ุชุดุฑูุญ ุงูุฌูุงุฒ ุงูููููู (ูุธุฑู 3)
๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
ุชุชู
ูุฒ ูุฐูู ุงูู
ูุฒู
ุฉ ุจุนูุฏุฉ ู
ูู
ูุฒุงุช :
1- ู
ูุชุฑุฌู
ุฉ ุชุฑุฌู
ุฉ ุชููุงุณุจ ุฌู
ูุน ุงูู
ุณุชููุงุช
2- ุชุญุชูู ุนูู 78 ุฑุณู
ุชูุถูุญู ููู ููู
ุฉ ู
ูุฌูุฏุฉ ุจุงูู
ูุฒู
ุฉ (ููู ููู
ุฉ !!!!)
#ููู
_ู
ุงูู_ุฏุฑุฎ
3- ุฏูุฉ ุงููุชุงุจุฉ ูุงูุตูุฑ ุนุงููุฉ ุฌุฏุงู ุฌุฏุงู ุฌุฏุงู
4- ูููุงูู ุจุนุถ ุงูู
ุนููู
ุงุช ุชู
ุชูุถูุญูุง ุจุดูู ุชูุตููู ุฌุฏุงู (ุชูุนุชุจุฑ ูุฏู ุงูุทุงูุจ ุฃู ุงูุทุงูุจุฉ ุจุฅููุง ู
ุนููู
ุงุช ู
ูุจูู
ุฉ ูู
ุน ุฐูู ุชู
ุชูุถูุญ ูุฐูู ุงูู
ุนููู
ุงุช ุงูู
ูุจูู
ุฉ ุจุดูู ุชูุตููู ุฌุฏุงู
5- ุงูู
ูุฒู
ุฉ ุชุดุฑุญ ููุณูุง ุจ ููุณูุง ุจุณ ุชููู ุชุนุงู ุงูุฑุงูู
6- ุชุญุชูู ุงูู
ูุฒู
ุฉ ูู ุงูู ุณูุงูุฏ ุนูู ุฎุงุฑุทุฉ ุชุชุถู
ู ุฌู
ูุน ุชูุฑูุนุงุช ู
ุนููู
ุงุช ุงูุฌูุงุฒ ุงูููููู ุงูู
ุฐููุฑุฉ ูู ูุฐูู ุงูู
ูุฒู
ุฉ
ูุงุฎูุฑุงู ูุฐูู ุงูู
ูุฒู
ุฉ ุญูุงูู ุนูููู
ูุฅุชู
ูู ู
ููู
ุฅู ุชุฏุนููู ุจุงูุฎูุฑ ูุงูุตุญุฉ ูุงูุนุงููุฉ ููุท
ูู ุงูุชูููู ุฒู
ูุงุฆู ูุฒู
ููุงุชู ุ ุฒู
ูููู
ู
ุญู
ุฏ ุงูุฐูุจู ๐๐
๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ
Leveraging Generative AI to Drive Nonprofit Innovation
In this webinar, participants learned how to utilize Generative AI to streamline operations and elevate member engagement. Amazon Web Service experts provided a customer specific use cases and dived into low/no-code tools that are quick and easy to deploy through Amazon Web Service (AWS.)
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering.pptx
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering
Syllabus
Chapter-1
Introduction to objective, scope and outcome the subject
Chapter 2
Introduction: Scope and Specialization of Civil Engineering, Role of civil Engineer in Society, Impact of infrastructural development on economy of country.
Chapter 3
Surveying: Object Principles & Types of Surveying; Site Plans, Plans & Maps; Scales & Unit of different Measurements.
Linear Measurements: Instruments used. Linear Measurement by Tape, Ranging out Survey Lines and overcoming Obstructions; Measurements on sloping ground; Tape corrections, conventional symbols. Angular Measurements: Instruments used; Introduction to Compass Surveying, Bearings and Longitude & Latitude of a Line, Introduction to total station.
Levelling: Instrument used Object of levelling, Methods of levelling in brief, and Contour maps.
Chapter 4
Buildings: Selection of site for Buildings, Layout of Building Plan, Types of buildings, Plinth area, carpet area, floor space index, Introduction to building byelaws, concept of sun light & ventilation. Components of Buildings & their functions, Basic concept of R.C.C., Introduction to types of foundation
Chapter 5
Transportation: Introduction to Transportation Engineering; Traffic and Road Safety: Types and Characteristics of Various Modes of Transportation; Various Road Traffic Signs, Causes of Accidents and Road Safety Measures.
Chapter 6
Environmental Engineering: Environmental Pollution, Environmental Acts and Regulations, Functional Concepts of Ecology, Basics of Species, Biodiversity, Ecosystem, Hydrological Cycle; Chemical Cycles: Carbon, Nitrogen & Phosphorus; Energy Flow in Ecosystems.
Water Pollution: Water Quality standards, Introduction to Treatment & Disposal of Waste Water. Reuse and Saving of Water, Rain Water Harvesting. Solid Waste Management: Classification of Solid Waste, Collection, Transportation and Disposal of Solid. Recycling of Solid Waste: Energy Recovery, Sanitary Landfill, On-Site Sanitation. Air & Noise Pollution: Primary and Secondary air pollutants, Harmful effects of Air Pollution, Control of Air Pollution. . Noise Pollution Harmful Effects of noise pollution, control of noise pollution, Global warming & Climate Change, Ozone depletion, Greenhouse effect
Text Books:
1. Palancharmy, Basic Civil Engineering, McGraw Hill publishers.
2. Satheesh Gopi, Basic Civil Engineering, Pearson Publishers.
3. Ketki Rangwala Dalal, Essentials of Civil Engineering, Charotar Publishing House.
4. BCP, Surveying volume 1
Level 3 NCEA - NZ: A Nation In the Making 1872 - 1900 SML.ppt
The History of NZ 1870-1900.
Making of a Nation.
From the NZ Wars to Liberals,
Richard Seddon, George Grey,
Social Laboratory, New Zealand,
Confiscations, Kotahitanga, Kingitanga, Parliament, Suffrage, Repudiation, Economic Change, Agriculture, Gold Mining, Timber, Flax, Sheep, Dairying,
A Visual Guide to 1 Samuel | A Tale of Two Hearts
These slides walk through the story of 1 Samuel. Samuel is the last judge of Israel. The people reject God and want a king. Saul is anointed as the first king, but he is not a good king. David, the shepherd boy is anointed and Saul is envious of him. David shows honor while Saul continues to self destruct.
Beyond Degrees - Empowering the Workforce in the Context of Skills-First.pptx
Ivรกn Bornacelly, Policy Analyst at the OECD Centre for Skills, OECD, presents at the webinar 'Tackling job market gaps with a skills-first approach' on 12 June 2024
THE SACRIFICE HOW PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTS STUDENTS ARE SACRIFICING TO CHANGE T...
The recent surge in pro-Palestine student activism has prompted significant responses from universities, ranging from negotiations and divestment commitments to increased transparency about investments in companies supporting the war on Gaza. This activism has led to the cessation of student encampments but also highlighted the substantial sacrifices made by students, including academic disruptions and personal risks. The primary drivers of these protests are poor university administration, lack of transparency, and inadequate communication between officials and students. This study examines the profound emotional, psychological, and professional impacts on students engaged in pro-Palestine protests, focusing on Generation Z's (Gen-Z) activism dynamics. This paper explores the significant sacrifices made by these students and even the professors supporting the pro-Palestine movement, with a focus on recent global movements. Through an in-depth analysis of printed and electronic media, the study examines the impacts of these sacrifices on the academic and personal lives of those involved. The paper highlights examples from various universities, demonstrating student activism's long-term and short-term effects, including disciplinary actions, social backlash, and career implications. The researchers also explore the broader implications of student sacrifices. The findings reveal that these sacrifices are driven by a profound commitment to justice and human rights, and are influenced by the increasing availability of information, peer interactions, and personal convictions. The study also discusses the broader implications of this activism, comparing it to historical precedents and assessing its potential to influence policy and public opinion. The emotional and psychological toll on student activists is significant, but their sense of purpose and community support mitigates some of these challenges. However, the researchers call for acknowledging the broader Impact of these sacrifices on the future global movement of FreePalestine.
Recently uploaded (20)
Andreas Schleicher presents PISA 2022 Volume III - Creative Thinking - 18 Jun...
Andreas Schleicher presents PISA 2022 Volume III - Creative Thinking - 18 Jun...
ย
NEWSPAPERS - QUESTION 1 - REVISION POWERPOINT.pptx
NEWSPAPERS - QUESTION 1 - REVISION POWERPOINT.pptx
ย
Philippine Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan (EPP) Curriculum
Philippine Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan (EPP) Curriculum
ย
BรI TแบฌP Dแบ Y THรM TIแบพNG ANH LแปP 7 Cแบข NฤM FRIENDS PLUS SรCH CHรN TRแปI SรNG Tแบ O ...
BรI TแบฌP Dแบ Y THรM TIแบพNG ANH LแปP 7 Cแบข NฤM FRIENDS PLUS SรCH CHรN TRแปI SรNG Tแบ O ...
ย
Leveraging Generative AI to Drive Nonprofit Innovation
Leveraging Generative AI to Drive Nonprofit Innovation
ย
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering.pptx
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering.pptx
ย
Level 3 NCEA - NZ: A Nation In the Making 1872 - 1900 SML.ppt
Level 3 NCEA - NZ: A Nation In the Making 1872 - 1900 SML.ppt
ย
spot a liar (Haiqa 146).pptx Technical writhing and presentation skills
spot a liar (Haiqa 146).pptx Technical writhing and presentation skills
ย
Beyond Degrees - Empowering the Workforce in the Context of Skills-First.pptx
Beyond Degrees - Empowering the Workforce in the Context of Skills-First.pptx
ย
THE SACRIFICE HOW PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTS STUDENTS ARE SACRIFICING TO CHANGE T...
THE SACRIFICE HOW PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTS STUDENTS ARE SACRIFICING TO CHANGE T...
ย
Logos -toulmin.revised
- 1. What we talk about when we talk about Argument
- 2. Letโs start with a claim
- 3. Women should be allowed to fight in US combat units
- 4. 1) They are physically capable. 2) Their presence would weaken gender stereotypes. 3) This would expand the opportunities for women in the military. Because...
- 5. 1) They are physically capable. What is the implied assumption? Because...
- 6. 2) Their presence would weaken gender stereotypes. What is the implied assumption? Because...
- 7. 3)This would expand the opportunities for women in the military. What is the implied assumption? Because...
- 9. Terms: Claim Reason Warrant Used to be called โimplied assumptionโ
- 10. Example: Claim Reason Warrant I shouldnโt have to take Algebra because I want to be a lawyer career utility should be the main justi๏ฌcation for class requirements
- 11. Your Turn: Claim Reason Warrant You should have to take algebra... ?????? ??????
- 12. An Argument: Parents should not allow their kids to own cellphones ...because they prevent kids from developing empathy. Reason Claim
- 13. An Argument: Parents should not allow their kids to own cellphones ...because they prevent kids from developing empathy. Reason Claim Grounds โขtestimony from kids โขresearch connecting technology use with negative behavior on-and offline
- 14. So Far: Claim Reason Warrant Parents should not allow their kids to own cellphones ...because they prevent kids from developing empathy. Developing empathy is an crucial element of growing up that parents should nurture.
- 15. So Far: Claim Reason Backing Parents should not allow their kids to own cellphones ...because they prevent kids from developing empathy. Arguments that show how important empathy is a child/adultโs life.
- 16. Almost Done
- 18. Two More terms: Rebuttal The opposing argument against your claim
- 19. Two More terms: Rebuttal Cellphones should be allowed because they help kids connect with their peers.
- 20. Two More terms: The degree to which you are confident in your claim. Qualifier
- 21. Two More terms: Cellphones should DEFINITELY be banned Qualifier
- 22. Two More terms: Cellphones should POSSIBLY be banned Qualifier
- 23. Two More terms: We should consider whether cellphones should be banned. Qualifier
- 25. OK, your turn: Warrant Backing Grounds Reason Claim Rebuttal Qualifier All students should be required to take AP Language in order to graduate.