AP Language - Ms. Seipp - Argumentative Quest

Ad Hominem Attack

Switching the argument from the topic to the other speaker

Arguable

Open to disagreement, able to be argued or asserted

Bandwagon

Evidence boils down to “everyone is doing it”

Begging the Question

When the argument’s premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it

ex: It’s true because it’s true

Claim

An assertion that states arguments main idea, must be arguable

Closed Thesis

A statement of the main idea that previews the major points a writer intends to make

Counterargument Thesis

A statement of counterargument that precedes writer’s opinion, usually begins with ‘although, but’

Fallacies of Relevance

Red herring, Ad hominem attack, Faulty analogy

Faulty Analogy

Compares 2 things not comparable

Fallacies of Accuracy

Straw man, False dilemma, Equivocation, Post Hoc

False Dilemma

Stating that 2 extreme options are the only choices

Claim types

Claim of Fact, Claim of policy, Claim of Value

Claim of Fact

Assert that something is true

ex. credibility of source

Quantitative

Data found with numbers or statistics

Types of Evidence

First-hand, second-hand

Evidence should be

Relevant, Accurate, Sufficient

First-hand Evidence

Evidence based on what author knows

ex. observation, general knowledge, personal experience

Fallacies of Insufficiency

Hasty generalization, Circular reasoning, Bandwagon, False authority, Slippery slope

Hasty Generalization

Not enough evidence to support a conclusion

Claim of Value

(most common) assert something is good/bad or right/wrong or desirable/undesirable

Logical Fallacies

Errors in reasoning or arguments that make them invalid or weak

Open thesis

Statement of the main idea that doesn’t list all the points covered in the essay (used for big papers)

Claim of Policy

Change should be made, begins with problem and explains change

Post Hoc

Can’t claim something is a cause just b/c it happened

Slippery Slope

Someone believes something small will snowball into something bigger

Red Herring

When a speaker skips to a new and irrelevant topic to avoid

Second-hand Evidence

Evidence assessed from research, reading, investigating

ex. factual and historic info, expert opinion, quantitative data

Straw man

Speaker chooses poor/oversimplified examples to ridicule opponent

GOPHERS

Types of evidence

Gophers

Government + current events

gOphers

Observation + personal experiences

goPhers

Philosophy + psychology

gopHers

History

gophErs

Entertainment + pop culture

gopheRs

Reading

gopherS

Science + Tech

Equivocation

Writer intentionally misleads audience with words of double meaning

Circular Reasoning

repeating claim as evidence = no evidence

False authority

someone who has no expertise speaks on the issue