Everything's an Argument Ch 1-7

Invitational argument

arguments inviting others to join in mutual exploration based on respect

Argument to convince

to believe; get reader's attention and concern and convince those who disagree

Arguments to persuade

to take action; want readers convinced and take action

Arguments to inform

writers to inform others, give information (ex. A bumper sticker)

Arguments to explore

exploring allows to fill in the blanks as they could and lead them to different conclusions; can be personal

Arguments to making decisions

exploring pros and cons

Argument of meditation or pray

writer/speaker is most often hoping to transform something in the individual to reach a peace of mind

Rhetoric

art of persuasion

Forensic

an argument in the past; court decisions, legal briefs, legislative hearings

Deliberative

argument in the future; proposals, bills, regulations

Epideictic/ceremonial

an argument in the present; contemporary values; eulogies, graduation speeches, sermons

Stasis theory

define questions designed to help examine legal cases to determine the point of contention in an argument; involves a statement that can be proved/disapproved w/ evidence/testimony

Stasis theory questions (4)

Did something happen
What is its nature
What is its quality or cause
What actions should be taken

Argument of fact

involves a statement that can be proved/disapproved with specific evidence or testimony

Argument of evaluation

present criteria and then measure individual people, ideas, or things against those standards

Proposal arguments

present an issue or problem so vividly

Pathos

generate emotions

Ethos

trustworthiness/credibility that writers come across to build bridges with audiences

Logos

logic often given prominence and authority

Kairos

suitable time/place for making an argument and the most opportune ways to make it; be able to understand and take advantage of shifting circumstances

Rhetorical situation

shorthand phrase for an entire set of relationships

Uses/rules of Pathos (5)

1) Use emotions to connect with readers to assure them that you understand their experiences.
2) Help readers identify with your experiences.
3) Use pathos to make logical claims stronger or more memorable.
4) Too much emotion (pity, shame) can make people uncomfortable and may offend people.
5) Humor can help open to a proposal.

Uses/rules of Ethos (8)

1) Ethos creates a quick and sometimes almost irresistible connections between audience and arguments.
2) Send signals about character and reliability.
3) Arguments on character depend on trust.
4) three main elements: trustworthiness, authority, unselfishness
5) Connecting your own beliefs to an argument that are well established and widely respected.
6) Use language others will understand.
7) Details matter: graphs, table, charts
8) Be able to answer any type of questions

Uses/rules of Logos (7)

1) Facts
2) Statistics
3) Surveys/Polls
4) Personal narratives
5) Syllogism
6) Enthymeme
7) Logical structures

Facts

1) Professional journalism
2) Reliably over time
3) Can reflect positively on writer

Statistics

1) Possible to lie with numbers
2) Need use them carefully and to remember that your interpretation of the stats are important

Surveys/Polls

1) Provide strong persuasive appeals for action/intervention
2) Ask: who is publishing the outcome, who was surveyed, and what are the stakes these parties might have in its outcome
3) Be confident that you've surveyed enough people to be accurate
4) Choose random
5) Affected by questions that are asked
6) Date of poll matters

Personal narratives

can support a claim convincingly, especially if a writer has earned the trust of readers

Syllogism

logic, common sense; has a conclusion: follows logically and technically

Enthymeme

describe ordinary kind of sentence that includes both a claim and reason but depends on audience's agreement w/ an assumption; can be persuasive and obvious

Logical structures

1) Degree: common that people barely notice; self-evident
2) Analogy: complex/extended comparisons, explain one idea/concept by comparing it to something else
3) Precedent: involve comparisons

Fallacies of Argument

Arguments flawed by their very nature/structure
Avoid them in writing because it can hurt anyone

Scare Tactic

Exaggerating
Stampede legitimate fears into panic/prejudice

Faulty analogy

Comparisons can help clarify one concept by measuring it against another that is more familiar
Inaccurate comparisons between objects/concepts

Red herring

Change subject to abruptly throw readers off the trail

Straw man

1) Attack an argument that isn't really there, often a much weaker/more extreme one than the opponent is actually making
2) Create an argument that's easy to knock down, proceeds to do so, and claims victory over opponent whose real argument was different

Non sequitur

claims/reasons/warrants don't connect logically
Occur when writer omit a step in a logical chain of reasoning

Equivocation

Half truths/arguments that give lies an honest appearance
Based on language
Use to cover up what is really going on

Begging the question

Made on grounds that can't be accepted as true because of those grounds themselves are in question
Assuming as true the very claim that's disputed, form of argument that goes nowhere

Faulty causality

"After this, there's this" cause and effect
Faulty assumption that because one event/action follows another

Hasty generalization

Inference is drawn from insufficient evidence
Based on stereotypes
Must always have sufficient evidence and qualify claims appropriately

Dogmatism

1) Writer who asserts/assumes that a particular position is the only one that is conceivably acceptable
2) Character that undermines the trust that must exist between those who make/listen to arguments
3) No arguments necessary; truth is self-evident

Stacking the deck

Show only one side of the story-the one in favor
Take big chance that your readers will react to not trust the writer

Ad Hominem

1) Attack the character of a person rather than claims he/she makes
2) Destroy the credibility of opponents or distract from successful arguments they may be offering
3) Two sided: good guys and bad guys
4) Attacking motives, backgrounds, and unchangeable traits

Either-Or choices

Reduce complicated issues to just two options: one obvious from the other
Well-intentioned strategies to get something accomplished

False authority

1) Writer offers themselves/other authorities as sufficient warrant for believing a claim
2) Sometimes aren't in texts or don't mean what the speaker thinks
Ex: religious believers base arguments on books/traditions that have great authority
3) Don't accept information just because it's been put forth by offices and agencies

Bandwagon appeals

Urge people to follow the same path everyone else takes
It's easier to follow others

Sentimental appeals

1) Use tender emotions excessively to distract readers from facts
2) Highly personal and individual and focus on heartwarming situations that make readers feel guilty

Slippery Slope

1) Portrays today's tiny misstep to tomorrow's disaster
2) Becomes wrongheaded
3) Exaggerates the likely consequences of an action to frightened readers

Inductive reasoning

piles up specific examples and draws a conclusion from them

Deductive reasoning

general principle and applies it to a specific case

Classical oration

1) Introduction: est. qualifications to write about the topic and common ground w/ audience, states your claim
2) Background: presents info (personal narrative)
3) Lines of argument: presents good reasons (logical/emotional appeals)
4) Alternative arguments: examines alternative points of view and opposing arguments
5) Conclusion: summarizes argument

Rogerian argument

approaches audiences in non-threatening ways, finding the common good/common ground and establishing trust among those who disagree about issues

1) Intro: writer describes issue, problem, or conflict in which they understand any alternative positions
2) Contexts: writer describes contexts alternatives positions may be valid
3) Writer's position: writer states their position on the issue present the circumstances
4) Benefits of opponent: writer explains opponents how they would benefit from adopting their position

Toulmin argument

examine some ways that people use informal logic in their everyday lives
will help writers come up w/ ideas and test them and figure out what goes where in many kinds of arguments; also provide the framework of an argument which you fill out with all kinds of data

1) Claim: argument wish to prove (good: personal experiences)
2) Qualifiers: any limits you place on your claim
3) reasons/evidence: support your claim
4) Warrants: underlying assumption that supports your claim ("how exactly do I get from the data to the claim?)
5) Backing: evidence for warrant

Conditions of rebuttal

potential objectors to an argument

Invoked Audience

The readers directly addressed or implied in a text, which may include some that the writer didn't consciously intend to reach

Intended Audience

the actual, real-life people whom a writer consciously wants to address in a piece of writing

Invitational argument

arguments inviting others to join in mutual exploration based on respect

Argument to convince

to believe; get reader's attention and concern and convince those who disagree

Arguments to persuade

to take action; want readers convinced and take action

Arguments to inform

writers to inform others, give information (ex. A bumper sticker)

Arguments to explore

exploring allows to fill in the blanks as they could and lead them to different conclusions; can be personal

Arguments to making decisions

exploring pros and cons

Argument of meditation or pray

writer/speaker is most often hoping to transform something in the individual to reach a peace of mind

Rhetoric

art of persuasion

Forensic

an argument in the past; court decisions, legal briefs, legislative hearings

Deliberative

argument in the future; proposals, bills, regulations

Epideictic/ceremonial

an argument in the present; contemporary values; eulogies, graduation speeches, sermons

Stasis theory

define questions designed to help examine legal cases to determine the point of contention in an argument; involves a statement that can be proved/disapproved w/ evidence/testimony

Stasis theory questions (4)

Did something happen
What is its nature
What is its quality or cause
What actions should be taken

Argument of fact

involves a statement that can be proved/disapproved with specific evidence or testimony

Argument of evaluation

present criteria and then measure individual people, ideas, or things against those standards

Proposal arguments

present an issue or problem so vividly

Pathos

generate emotions

Ethos

trustworthiness/credibility that writers come across to build bridges with audiences

Logos

logic often given prominence and authority

Kairos

suitable time/place for making an argument and the most opportune ways to make it; be able to understand and take advantage of shifting circumstances

Rhetorical situation

shorthand phrase for an entire set of relationships

Uses/rules of Pathos (5)

1) Use emotions to connect with readers to assure them that you understand their experiences.
2) Help readers identify with your experiences.
3) Use pathos to make logical claims stronger or more memorable.
4) Too much emotion (pity, shame) can make people uncomfortable and may offend people.
5) Humor can help open to a proposal.

Uses/rules of Ethos (8)

1) Ethos creates a quick and sometimes almost irresistible connections between audience and arguments.
2) Send signals about character and reliability.
3) Arguments on character depend on trust.
4) three main elements: trustworthiness, authority, unselfishness
5) Connecting your own beliefs to an argument that are well established and widely respected.
6) Use language others will understand.
7) Details matter: graphs, table, charts
8) Be able to answer any type of questions

Uses/rules of Logos (7)

1) Facts
2) Statistics
3) Surveys/Polls
4) Personal narratives
5) Syllogism
6) Enthymeme
7) Logical structures

Facts

1) Professional journalism
2) Reliably over time
3) Can reflect positively on writer

Statistics

1) Possible to lie with numbers
2) Need use them carefully and to remember that your interpretation of the stats are important

Surveys/Polls

1) Provide strong persuasive appeals for action/intervention
2) Ask: who is publishing the outcome, who was surveyed, and what are the stakes these parties might have in its outcome
3) Be confident that you've surveyed enough people to be accurate
4) Choose random
5) Affected by questions that are asked
6) Date of poll matters

Personal narratives

can support a claim convincingly, especially if a writer has earned the trust of readers

Syllogism

logic, common sense; has a conclusion: follows logically and technically

Enthymeme

describe ordinary kind of sentence that includes both a claim and reason but depends on audience's agreement w/ an assumption; can be persuasive and obvious

Logical structures

1) Degree: common that people barely notice; self-evident
2) Analogy: complex/extended comparisons, explain one idea/concept by comparing it to something else
3) Precedent: involve comparisons

Fallacies of Argument

Arguments flawed by their very nature/structure
Avoid them in writing because it can hurt anyone

Scare Tactic

Exaggerating
Stampede legitimate fears into panic/prejudice

Faulty analogy

Comparisons can help clarify one concept by measuring it against another that is more familiar
Inaccurate comparisons between objects/concepts

Red herring

Change subject to abruptly throw readers off the trail

Straw man

1) Attack an argument that isn't really there, often a much weaker/more extreme one than the opponent is actually making
2) Create an argument that's easy to knock down, proceeds to do so, and claims victory over opponent whose real argument was different

Non sequitur

claims/reasons/warrants don't connect logically
Occur when writer omit a step in a logical chain of reasoning

Equivocation

Half truths/arguments that give lies an honest appearance
Based on language
Use to cover up what is really going on

Begging the question

Made on grounds that can't be accepted as true because of those grounds themselves are in question
Assuming as true the very claim that's disputed, form of argument that goes nowhere

Faulty causality

"After this, there's this" cause and effect
Faulty assumption that because one event/action follows another

Hasty generalization

Inference is drawn from insufficient evidence
Based on stereotypes
Must always have sufficient evidence and qualify claims appropriately

Dogmatism

1) Writer who asserts/assumes that a particular position is the only one that is conceivably acceptable
2) Character that undermines the trust that must exist between those who make/listen to arguments
3) No arguments necessary; truth is self-evident

Stacking the deck

Show only one side of the story-the one in favor
Take big chance that your readers will react to not trust the writer