COMM385 Exam 1: Concept 6 - Argument (Logos and Friends)

Logos

• One of the three “artistic proofs” of persuasion

• The reason, logic, and evidence of an argument

Types of Argumentative Reasoning

• Deduction

  • General —> Specific conclusion

  • Syllogism

• Induction

  • Specific observation(s) —> General conclusion

  • Argument by example

• Abduction

  • Incomplete observations —> Best prediction

Argument Structure Parts

• Data

  • Minor Premise (specific)

  • Evidence

  • Explicit/Factual

• Warrants

  • Major Premise (general)

  • Rules

  • Implications

    • Vary in step size

    • Vary in probability

A Simple Syllogistic Argument

Argument Content Factors

• Type of Evidence/Data

  • Statistical > testimonial (“this happened to me”) > anecdotal (a story you’ve heard) & analogical (?; not evidence at all, just an analogy)

• Message Sidedness

  • One vs. Two

    • Two Refutational > One > Two Non-Refuational

    • Issue involvement, audience (un)favorability

    • Advertising or not

Argumentative Issues and Fallacies: Formal vs. Informal

• Formal (Structural) Fallacies

  • Non Sequitur (warrant doesn’t match conclusions)

• Informal (Reasoning) Fallacies

  • Post hoc ergo propter hoc: Issues of causation (causation ≠ correlation)

  • Onus probandi: Argument from ignorance

  • Circulus in demonstration/petitio principii: Begging the question (saying your conclusion)

Argumentative Issues and Fallacies: Red Herrings pt. 1

Red Herring (statement you make that are not actually relevant)

• Ad hominem (argument directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining)

• Appeals to (“you should trust me because…”):

  • Authority, wealth, morality, novelty, nature, common sense, emotion

  • “Don’t look at the argument. Instead focus on your feelings or focus on the fact that I’m in charge.”

Argumentative Issues and Fallacies: Red Herrings pt. 2

• Appeal to Probability/Change

  • Gambler’s fallacy (“I flipped heads five times in a row. The next one’s gotta be tails”)

• Bandwagoning (argumentum ad populum)

• Association fallacy (“Hey that person is fashionable, that means whatever he’s wearing is fashionable”)

• Straw man fallacy (You present what your opponent is arguing, but the opponent is not actually arguing that)

Argumentative Issues and Fallacies: Faulty Generalizations

• Cherry Picking (“I found an instance of this; therefore, it must be true”)

• Accident (exception to the rule ignored)

• False analogy (“we can all agree that one this is true. Therefore, we should all agree all other things are true”)

• False dichotomy (“it either has to be only one thing or another”)

(More) Argument Structure Parts

• Backing

  • While warrants are implications, backing is factual

• Qualifications

  • Warrants don’t apply in all circumstances

    • Qualifications form a boundary for the warrant

• Rebuttal

  • Conclusions do not always follow from warrants

Which rhetorical proof is most strongly aligned with what Toulmin (argument structure) is describing?

Logos

What are some elements of an argument that make it more effective?

Qualifiers, rebuttal, two-sided argument (only stronger sometimes, depending on the group of people involved/hearing the argument)