Chapter 16: Making Arguments
Argument Structure and Rhetoric
Quote by Rumi: "Raise your words, not your voice. It is rain that grows flowers, not thunder."
Emphasizes the importance of constructive dialogue rather than aggressive rhetoric.
Overview of Argumentation in Chapter 16
Focus Areas:
Definition of an argument
Exploration of different logical fallacies
Organizational patterns for effective persuasion
Understanding Arguments
Basic Structure:
Rhetorical Triangle: Ethos (credibility), Logos (logic), Pathos (emotion).
Essential Components of an Argument:
Claim: A statement that asserts a belief or truth.
Evidence: The data or facts that support the claim.
Warrant: The reasoning that connects the claim and the evidence together.
Importance of Studying Argumentation
Effects on Audience:
Rational arguments enhance receptivity to the speaker's claims.
Well-constructed arguments can positively influence audience emotions, ensuring that speakers do not solely rely on emotional appeals that may be based on fallacies.
Improving Persuasive Ability:
Understanding argumentation aids in identifying persuasive techniques employed by others, enhancing one’s capacity to argue effectively.
Formal Logics and Everyday Arguments
Everyday Arguments: Often lack fully articulated evidence and warrant.
Aristotle's Concept of Enthymeme:
Everyday arguments often exclude formal premises, allowing audiences to draw conclusions subconsciously.
Types of Reasoning
Deductive Reasoning:
From general premises to specific conclusions.
Example of a Syllogism:
Major Premise: All men are mortal.
Minor Premise: Socrates is a man.
Conclusion: Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
Inductive Reasoning:
From specific premises to general conclusions.
Example: From personal experience with Professor Smith to concluding that all students should take courses with him due to his teaching style.
Syllogisms vs. Everyday Arguments
Characteristics of Syllogisms:
Full articulation of major and minor premises.
Contrasts with everyday arguments that often omit explicit premises.
Example of Non-Syllogistic Argument: "Socrates died because he was mortal" assumes the major premise without stating it.
Translating Syllogisms into Public Speaking
Encourage non-stated premises for audience engagement; allowing them to fill in gaps enhances persuasion.
Contemporary Argument Framework:
Claim, Evidence, Warrant structure.
Types of Claims:
Claim of Fact: Asserts truth or falsehood (e.g., "Eating that footlong submarine sandwich made me sick.").
Claim of Value: Asserts good or bad (e.g., "I should not have eaten that footlong sandwich because it was a bad idea.").
Claim of Policy: Advocates for or against an action or policy (e.g., "That store should not sell such large sandwiches.").
Importance of Evidence and Reasoning (Warrant)
Evidence: Essential for supporting the claims; type hinges on speech goals.
Warrant: Crucial linkage between claim and evidence; may often be unstated.
Beware of common mistakes regarding assumptions and audience familiarity.
Logical Fallacies in Argumentation
Definition of Fallacies: Errors in reasoning that can be deliberate or accidental; these weaken arguments and produce emotional responses rather than logical conclusions.
Types of Fallacies:
Ad Hominem: Attacking character to divert attention from the argument.
Ad Baculum: Using fear-based appeals or threats.
Ad Misericordiam: Evoking pity to persuade.
Ad Populum: Appeals to popular sentiment without evidence.
Bandwagon Fallacy: Assumption that something is true or valid because it is popular.
Either-Or Fallacy (False Dilemma): Presenting two options as the only possibilities when more exist.
Non Sequitur: Conclusions that do not logically follow from premises.
Red Herring: Distracting from the issue by introducing irrelevant information.
Slippery Slope: Arguing that one event will lead to a series of negative consequences.
Straw Man Fallacy: Misrepresenting an opponent's argument to easily refute it.
Examples of Fallacies**
Ad Baculum: "You're either with us or I'm going to hurt you."
Ad Populum: "Everyone is doing it, so it must be the right thing to do."
Either-Or Fallacy: "Love it or leave it!" - oversimplified choice.
Organizational Patterns for Persuasive Speech
Monroe's Motivated Sequence:
Attention: Grab audience's interest.
Need: Identify the problem.
Satisfaction: Present solutions.
Visualization: Illustrate the benefits of the solution.
Action: Call to action.
Problem-Solution Pattern: Clearly define a problem followed by proposed solutions.
Refutation Pattern: Address counterarguments while defending a position (Inoculation Effect).
Comparative Advantage: Show why one solution is preferable over others.
Conclusion
Kenneth Burke’s Insight: "Wherever there is persuasion, there is rhetoric, and wherever there is rhetoric, there is meaning."
Emphasizes the centrality of rhetoric in constructing meaningful arguments.