Debate mid term combined

Toulmin Model

A diagram containing six interrelated components used for analyzing (and creating!) arguments.

Claim

The idea or action for which you are seeking adherence—it is the end goal of the argument.

Grounds

Primary source of support —gives listeners reasons for following the claim.

Warrant

The logical movement from the ground to the claim—this demonstrates why the data does indeed support the claims, often assumed/unsaid but not always.

Backing/Evidence

Any support (specific instances, statistics, testimony, values, or credibility) that provides more specific data for the grounds or warrant.

Qualifier

A statement that indicates the force of the argument—look for modifying words like 'probably' or 'in most cases.'

Rebuttal

The basis on which the claim could be questioned by decision makers. Addresses potential objections to the claim.

Absurd acts

Acts like selling body parts on Ebay illustrate that our civilization is teetering on the edge.

Public popularity

The basis for determining whose face belongs on Mt. Rushmore.

1st amendment

It is designed to protect symbolic, political acts such as flag burning.

Legitimate sports

Newspapers only print the results of legitimate sports, making newspaper coverage a reliable sign of a genuine sport.

Sample Toulmin Argument #1

Claim: I am now convinced that we are perilously close to the end of civilization. Grounds: William Shatner sold his kidney stone on EBay for $25,000. Warrant: Absurd acts like selling body parts on Ebay illustrate that our civilization is teetering on the edge.

Sample Toulmin Argument #2

Claim: Ronald Reagan's likeness should be chiseled onto Mt. Rushmore. Grounds: Polls show Americans rank him with JFK and Lincoln as one of the greatest presidents of all time. Warrant: Public popularity is the basis for determining whose face belongs on Mt. Rushmore.

Sample Toulmin Argument #3

Claim: People may not like it, but citizens have a Constitutional right to burn the American flag. Grounds: Flag burning is a symbolic, political act and it is precisely such unpopular, offensive symbolic acts that the 1st amendment was designed to protect. Warrant: Not only words, but symbolic acts, such as flag burning, are encompassed within the scope of the 1st amendment.

Sample Toulmin Argument #4

Claim: WWE wrestling is fake. Grounds: The results are never reported in the Sports section of the newspaper. Warrant: Newspapers only print the results of legitimate sports → newspaper coverage is a reliable sign of a genuine sport.

Communication

The process of sharing information and meaning.

Physical Needs

Basic requirements fulfilled through communication interactions.

Relational Needs

Emotional connections developed through interpersonal communication.

Identity Needs

Self-concept shaped by communication with others.

Spiritual Needs

Communication that fulfills personal beliefs and values.

Symbolic Communication

Use of symbols to convey meaning beyond physical properties.

Properties of Symbols

Characteristics: abstract, arbitrary, and ambiguous in meaning.

Abstract Symbols

Meanings exist in the mind, not in nature.

Arbitrary Symbols

Meanings assigned by individuals, not inherent to symbols.

Ambiguous Symbols

Symbols with multiple meanings depending on context.

Primary evidence

Original source data gathered firsthand.

Secondary evidence

Intermediary interpretation of primary evidence.

Direct evidence

Evidence directly supports the claim made.

Circumstantial evidence

Indirect evidence inferring facts from related facts.

Positive evidence

Presence of evidence supporting a claim.

Negative evidence

Absence of evidence used to support a claim.

Willing evidence

Freely given evidence, often from interested parties.

Reluctant evidence

Unexpected evidence from a biased source.

Testimony

Personal account or statement from an individual.

Statistics

Numerical data supporting a claim.

Objects and Visual Image

Physical items or images used as evidence.

Relevance

Evidence's applicability to the claim made.

Specificity

Clarity and detail of the evidence presented.

Objectivity

Unbiased nature of the evidence source.

Reliability

Historical accuracy of the evidence source.

Access

Source's firsthand knowledge of the issue.

Expertise

Source's extensive knowledge background.

Recency/timeliness

Evidence's relevance to the current time period.

External consistency

Alignment with other available evidence.

Internal consistency

Coherence within the evidence itself.

Cumulativeness

Collective evidence supporting the overall claim.

Claims, Evidence, and Assumptions Activity

An exercise that involves diagramming an argument by identifying its claims, evidence, and assumptions.

Geography of the Argument

Framework for understanding different elements of an argument, specifically the problem, solution, and argumentation.

Problem City

A conceptual area in an argument where issues are identified and analyzed regarding their significance and inherent need for change.

Inherency

The quality of being built into the status quo, proving that a problem needs to be addressed.

Significance in Argumentation

The extent to which a problem exists, measured by its impact and how many people are affected.

Harm

The severity of the problem, comparing minor issues to major ones, such as a hangnail versus a missing limb.

Barriers in Problem Solving

Obstacles created by the status quo that prevent resolving the identified problem, which can be structural or attitudinal.

Solution Square

The framework for detailing potential solutions, including whether it is a single or multiple solutions, the steps involved, and who is responsible.

Solvency

The ability of a proposed solution to effectively resolve the problem in question.

Plan meet Need (PMN)

A method to prove solvency by demonstrating that the solution adequately addresses the need created by the problem.

Comparative Advantages (CA)

A method to prove solvency by showing that the solution will result in an overall improvement compared to the current situation.

Cost in Argumentation

The financial implications associated with implementing a solution to a problem.

Desirability in Argumentation

The value judgment concerning whether a proposed solution is deemed worth the cost, based on criteria for 'goodness'.

Disadvantages in Argumentation

A consideration of how the benefits of a solution outweigh any potential drawbacks.