Toulmin Model of Argument: The twentieth-century British philosopher Stephen Toulmin noticed that good, realistic arguments typically will consist of six parts. He used these terms to describe the items. Data: The facts or evidence used to prove the argument Claim: The statement being argued (a thesis) Warrants: The general, hypothetical (and often implicit) logical statements that serve as bridges between the claim and the data. Qualifiers: Statements that limit the strength of the argument or statements that propose the conditions under which the argument is true. Rebuttals: Counter-arguments or statements indicating circumstances when the general argument does not hold true. Backing: Statements that serve to support the warrants (i.e., arguments that don't necessarily prove the main point being argued, but which do prove the warrants are true.) Toulmin's diagram of arguments typically looks something like this example: An argument written in this manner unfolds to reveal both the strengths and limits of the argument. This is as it should be. No argument should pretend to be stronger than it is or apply further than it is meant to. The point here isn't to "win" or "beat" all the counter-arguments; the point is to come as close to the truth or as close to a realistic and feasible solution as we possibly can. Note that opening structure of "Data" leads to "Claim with qualifiers" is similar to the structure of a thesis in the form of an enthymeme, in which [one clause presenting a reason or evidence] leads to [another clause presenting an argument.] Toulmin's model reminds us that arguments are generally expressed with qualifiers and rebuttals rather than asserted as absolutes. This lets the reader know how to take the reasoning, how far it is meant to be applied, and how general it is meant to be. Here is an example from John Gage's The Shape of Reason in which the various parts of an argument are labeled: Congress should ban animal research (Claim #1) because animals are tortured in experiments that have no necessary benefit for humans such as the testing of cosmetics (Data). The well being of animals is more important than the profits of the cosmetics industry (Warrant). Only congress has the authority to make such a law (Warrant) because the corporations can simply move from state to state to avoid legal penalties (Backing). Of course, this ban should not apply to medical research (Qualifier). A law to ban all research would go too far (Rebuttal). So, the law would probably (qualifier) have to be carefully written to define the kinds of research intended (claim #2). The Toulmin model is useful for analyzing an argument you are reading. That was Toulmin's original purpose--the analysis of how arguments work. On the other hand, some students find it useful to use the Toulmin model as a basis for structure and organization. We might organize our essay in the following manner: I. I ...

1. Toulmin Model of Argument:
The twentieth-century British philosopher Stephen Toulmin
noticed that good, realistic arguments typically
will consist of six parts. He used these terms to describe the
items.
Data: The facts or evidence used to prove the argument
Claim: The statement being argued (a thesis)
Warrants: The general, hypothetical (and often implicit) logical
statements that serve as bridges between the
claim and the data.
Qualifiers: Statements that limit the strength of the argument or
statements that propose the conditions under
which the argument is true.
Rebuttals: Counter-arguments or statements indicating
circumstances when the general argument does not
hold true.
Backing: Statements that serve to support the warrants (i.e.,
arguments that don't necessarily prove the main
point being argued, but which do prove the warrants are true.)
Toulmin's diagram of arguments typically looks something like
this example:
An argument written in this manner unfolds to reveal both the
strengths and limits of the argument. This is as
it should be. No argument should pretend to be stronger than it
is or apply further than it is meant to. The
point here isn't to "win" or "beat" all the counter-arguments; the

2. point is to come as close to the truth or as
close to a realistic and feasible solution as we possibly can.
Note that opening structure of "Data" leads to
"Claim with qualifiers" is similar to the structure of a thesis in
the form of an enthymeme, in which [one
clause presenting a reason or evidence] leads to [another clause
presenting an argument.]
Toulmin's model reminds us that arguments are generally
expressed with qualifiers and rebuttals rather than
asserted as absolutes. This lets the reader know how to take the
reasoning, how far it is meant to be applied,
and how general it is meant to be. Here is an example from John
Gage's The Shape of Reason in which the
various parts of an argument are labeled:
Congress should ban animal research (Claim #1) because
animals are tortured in experiments that
have no necessary benefit for humans such as the testing of
cosmetics (Data). The well being of
animals is more important than the profits of the cosmetics
industry (Warrant). Only congress has the
authority to make such a law (Warrant) because the corporations
can simply move from state to state
to avoid legal penalties (Backing). Of course, this ban should
not apply to medical research (Qualifier). A
law to ban all research would go too far (Rebuttal).
So, the law would probably (qualifier) have to be carefully
written to define the kinds of research
intended (claim #2).

3. The Toulmin model is useful for analyzing an argument you are
reading. That was Toulmin's original
purpose--the analysis of how arguments work. On the other
hand, some students find it useful to use the
Toulmin model as a basis for structure and organization. We
might organize our essay in the following
manner:
I. Introduction of the problem or topic.
A. Material to get the reader's attention (a "hook")
B. Introduce the problem or topic
C. Introduce our claim or thesis, perhaps with accompanying
qualifiers that limit the scope of
the argument. (NB: This will help you cut the topic down to a
manageable length.)
II. Offer data (reasons or evidence) to support the argument.
A. Datum #1
B. Datum #2
C. (and so on)
III. Explore warrants that show how the data logically is
connected to the data
A. Warrant #1
B. Warrant #2
C. (and so on)
IV. Offer factual backing to show that logic used in the
warrants is good in term of realism as well
as theory.
A. Backing for Warrant #1
B. Backing for Warrant #2
C. (and so on)

4. V. Discuss counter-arguments and provide rebuttal
A. Counter-argument #1
B. Rebuttal to counter-argument #1
C. Counter-argument #2
D. Rebuttal to counter-argument #2
E. (and so on)
VI. Conclusion
A. Implications of the argument, summation of points, or final
evocative thought to ensure the
reader remembers the argument.
Assignment!
You are caring for a 32-year-old male client who pushes his call
light stating he is experiencing intermittent, sharp precordial
chest pain that radiates to his neck since being admitted during
the night. He gets relief if he sits and leans forward, but the
pain gets worse with swallowing. He rates the pain at 5 out of
10 on a numerical scale. He has not received any medication for
the pain since admitted to your floor. On physical examination,
a pericardial friction rub can be heard. From your morning
report, you are aware that he had an upper respiratory tract
infection two weeks ago.
Based on the client's presenting symptoms and physical
findings, discuss the most probable diagnosis that would
support your response with evidence from the literature.
Peers Response to assignment
Peer 1: Luisa Perez posted
According to the symptoms experienced by the patient and the
physical findings during assessment the patient has pericarditis.

5. Pericarditis is the inflammation of the pericardium and the
condition can be acute or chronic (McCance & Huether, 2019).
Acute pericarditis is often autoimmune or caused by a viral
infection (McCance & Huether). Heart attack or heart surgery,
other medical conditions, injuries, or medications are also other
possible causes of pericarditis (Heart.org). It was mentioned
that the patient had a respiratory tract infection two weeks ago
during morning report. This information helped us tremendously
in narrowing down the diagnoses. McCance & Huether (2019)
state, “Possible sequelae of pericarditis include recurrent
pericarditis, pericardial constriction, and cardiac tamponade”
(p. 1088). Symptoms include retrosternal chest pain that
worsens with respiratory movements and when in a recumbent
position, pain that radiates to the back (McCance & Huether).
This would explain why the patient gets relief when sitting up
or leaning forward and that the pain radiates to his neck.
McCance & Huether state, “A friction rub- a scratchy, grating
sound- may be heard at the cardiac apex and left sternal border
and is caused by the roughened pericardial membranes rubbing
against each other” (p. 1088). The friction rub was heard during
physical examination of the patient.
Resources
Heart.org. (2016). What is Pericarditis? Retrieved
from https://www.heart.org/en/health-topics/pericarditis/what-
is-pericarditis
McCance, K. & Huether, S. (2019). Pathophysiology: The
Biologic Basis for Disease in Adults and Children (8th ed.). St.
Louis, MO: Elsevier.
Peer 2: Dianne Nalwoga posted
A 32-year-old male client complains of intermittent sharp
precordial chest pain that radiates to his neck getting relief
when he sits and leans forward, but also states that the pain gets
worse with swallowing. He rates the pain at 5 out of 10. Upon

6. auscultation, a pericardial friction rub can be heard. Patient has
a history of upper respiratory tract infection that he suffered
two weeks ago. Based on the patient’s complaints, the probable
diagnosis would be acute pericarditis.
“Acute pericarditis is acute inflammation of the pericardium.
The etiology of acute pericarditis is most often idiopathic
(autoimmune) or caused by viral infection” (McCance &
Huether, 2019). This is consistent with the patient’s findings as
it is evident that the patient in question had an upper respiratory
infection just a couple weeks prior. Highly specific to acute
pericarditis is “chest pain, a pericardial friction rub,
electrocardiographic changes” (Mullen, 2014). A friction rub is
a scratchy, grating sound that may be heard at the cardiac apex
and left sternal border and is caused by the roughened
pericardial membranes rubbing against each other (McCance &
Huether, 2019). This is indicative of chest pain that is
exacerbated in the supine position that is relieved by sitting
upward and leaning forward. To further explore the underlying
cause of pericarditis and its severity a physician may order tests
such as EKG, Chest X-ray, electrocardiographic (ECG),
ultrasound, CT scan, and MRI. Individuals with acute
pericarditis also report dysphagia, restlessness, irritability,
anxiety, weakness, and malaise (McCance & Huether, 2019). CT
scan of the neck and chest can be used to confirm cardiomegaly
pressing against the esophagus which can cause dysphagia the
thus leaning forward motion to relieve pressure on the
esophagus.
The purpose of treating acute pericarditis is to alleviate and
prevent complications. “Because of the brevity of the duration
of the illness, treatment is generally supportive based on
symptoms and aimed at alleviating the causative factor if
possible” (Mullen, 2014). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories at
high doses can help reduce the inflammation and associated
pain. However, indomethacin should be avoided in patients with
confirmed or suspected coronary artery disease because of its
vasoconstrictive effects (Mullen, 2014).

7. References
McCance, K. & Huether, S. (2019). Pathophysiology: The
Biologic Basis for Disease in Adults and Children (8th ed.). St.
Louis, MO: Elsevier.
Mullen, B. A. (2014). Acute Chest Pain in the Young Adult.
Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 10(2), 128–135.