Inventions of arguments
1. Contradiction and paradox not the same thing
2. Invention - what you argue, Invention discovers the argument
3. Organization - how you arrange your argument, Organization gives form to the
argumentative matter. A beginning middle and end
4. Style - how you express it , how the substance of it will be arranged
5. Opinion isn't argument
a. Opinions must be focuses
b. Must be stated as preposition (Ie have a thesis)
c. Must be supported by both a development
Focused arguments,
1. Understand the parameters of the prompt.
a. Most prompts are either questions to be answered or
b. Positions that must be against the stated argument
2. How long is the assignment
a. What demands the length and place on the scope of the argument
3. What can you reasonably accomplish within the word limit?
An argument MUST have a thesis
1. Once focused an essay must have an argument to govern it.
2. Thesis is a governing proposition determine enough to provide unity and coherence
1. Thesis will need proof
a. Distinguish between aspects and points
2. Inductive- uses specific observations to draw a general conclusion
3. Deductive reasoning - uses a general premise to form a specific conclusion
Syllogism - disjunctive
1. They are not commonly written in the open
2. Categorical syllogism
a. All a are b
b. All c are a
c. All c are b
3. Hypothetical
a. If a then B
b. If b then C
c. Therefore if a then C
Claim and proof - (needs a warrant)
1. Warrant - unstated assumption linking claim and support
a. When we disagree with an argument its generally the warrant that we disagree
with
b. Allows us to scrutinize our own ideas with this
c. Warrants are a byproduct of argument
Types of Claims
1. Five major types of claims
a. Claims of fact
b. Claims of definition
c. Claims of cause
d. Claims of value
e. Claims of policy
2. Need to know the type of claim we are using to better support our type of claims
a. Can identify claims type by identifying the implicit question it answers
3. Claims of Fact
a. They make statements about the existence of truth or about its truth
b. Questions like is X true
i. This is support by HARD FACTS
c. Very information heavy
i. Requires studying of lots of counter positions or items tat you are
comparing against.
ii. Claim Example
1. Makes all pens write better
2. The C8 is the best car
3. Bigfoot is real
iii. Warrants are alot stronger in these
1. IE
a. Bigfoot is real BECAUSE we have accounts form across
the world
4. Claims of Definitions
a. Describe what something is and or place it within a specific category. They may
also describe a particular way in which something should be interpreted.
b. Claims of definition are most effectively supported by professionals and
examples.
c. They quill very often but not always contain the form of the verb “to be”
i. Claim of Definition
1. It wouldn't be christmas without getting them an Xbox
a. Warrant is that gift giving is the essence of Christmas
2. Another example
a. Love is what makes a subaru a subaru
i. How that is physically impossible.
ii. Definitions tend to exclude more then they include.
5. Claims of Cause
a. Claims of cause identify the cause or source of something , they may also
discuss effects and or the potential results .
b. Claims of cause are most efficiently supported by stats, historic examples,
induction and deduction
i. Tv makes us smarter
1. He gives factual support NOT cause and effect
2. Bold assumptions about the audience wanting to study and
understand the complexity of the show
ii. Peoples hair being sunshine bright after suing white rain shampoo
1. No factual support
6. Claims of Value
a. Claims of value make a judgment on whether something is good bad moderately
good sometimes bad when used the wrong way,
i. When making a claim of value it is important to establish the standards
by which you are judging the value
1. Establish standards by asking,
a. What are the characteristics and features of the object of
my evaluation that makes it good or bad
b. What makes a good love song
c. What makes a good car
b. Claims of value are best supported by appeals to common ground, citations of
moral authority, and examples.
i. Definitions too
7. Claims of Policy
a. Claims of policy describe how the world should be or how particular societies
should function
i. Claims of policy most often but not always include the word “should”
b. Claims of policy are most effectively supported by factual support, appeals to
ethics.
8. Why are claim types important
a. You should be able to identify the types of claims you are making to generate
strong warrants with the most effective type of support
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. Types of proof
a. Aristotle in his Rhetoric divides proof into there ebasica categories
i. Logos
1. Logical proof, appeals to reason/the intellect
ii. Ethos
1. Appeal to the audience's sense of the arguer's character. An
audience is likely to accept an argument from a writer with a good
ethos rather then bad
iii. Pathos
1. Emotional proof, uses evidence that appeals to the audiences
emotions
iv. While all are valid, our arguments should primarily employ the logos
2. Logos Proofs
a. Sign,
i. Evidentiary support that takes a visually / perceptible sign and draws an
inference from it
1. “She obviously has chicken pox, look at the red dots all over her
face and arms)
ii. We can make a distinction from infallible and fallible signs.
1. Fallible
a. Are those that make indicate a state of affairs
i. A cough MAY be a cold
2. Infallible
a. They are ALWAYS indicating something has happened.
i. Smoke = fire
iii. Signs are misleading
1. Very often need more evidence to support the signs
iv. Signs are commonly used for stereotypes
3. Logical Proofs
a. Induction
i. Evidentiary support that proves a claim by drawing a universal parcel from
a specific number of examples
ii. Goes from specific to general.
1. Make an universal rule or outcome based on analysis of a specific
case
b. Examples
i. The sun will rise tomorrow cus it continues too since the dawn of time
ii. Induction can be problematic
1. All swans i've seen are white, therefore all swans are white
a. This can be false as the warrant si the person has seen
every swan
c. Deduction
i. The inverse of induction
1. Warrants are important here
a. Warrants figure prominently here, they must be sound
b. Nemo is a fish, therefore Nemo can Swim
d. Cause
i. You can support with causes and effects of something
1. “Shouldnt smoke when pregnant cuz the nicotine can get the child
addicted”
ii. The proof of cause is distinct from a claim of cause in the emphasis
placed on it, and its purpose.
1. The goal of the claim of cause is to demonstrate the cause effect
relationship.
a. The goal of proof of cause, is to stupor large different
claims all together.
e. Definition
i. Just the same way you can have a claim of definition, you can use
definition to support .
1. They proceed by defining a term/concept using that definition to
support a larger claim.
2. Must be very precise in definition
f. Analogy
i. Historical
1. Base you claim on the similarities between the current situation
and historical one
ii. Literal
1. Base your claim on two things in the same category
iii. Figurative
1. Base your claim on two things in different categories
g. Statistics
i. Careful that stats are accurate
4. Ethos Proofs
a. Your own credibility as an arguer
i. You base this on
1. Exp
2. Education
3. Training
4. Past history, etc
ii. Also can do so by arguing fairly
b. The credibility of your sources
i. Citing authoritative sources,
1. Studies from well respected universities/journals
a. What types of things does someone do to appear a
i. Credible
ii. Trustworthy
iii. Civil
5. Pathos
a. Pathos appeals are those that address themselves to the reader. They aim to
move, not persuade
i. Aiming for emotions
b. There are twp main varieties of Pathos appeal
i. Value appeals and motivational appeals
1. Value appeals
a. You prove your claim by drawing upon ideas that produce
an emotional responding in your audience
b. Make your audience afraid by downing this things
c. Motivational proofs
i. Appeal to what your audience wants
6. Logical fallacies
a. Logical - sometimes called rhetorical - fallacies are argumentative errors that
invalidate a given argument
i. Specifically these are errors involving the connection between a claim and
its support
ii. Usually fallacies proceed on shaky warrants/premises. Their assumptions
once examined re neither acceptable nor persuasive
iii. Most fallacies are unintentional mistakes. But sometimes people use
them because they can be rhetorically effective if they're not scrutinized
as arguments
iv. The key thing to remember with fallacies is that they undermine the whale
argument in which they occur. A claim may be accurate but if it's based
on fallacious reasoning you shouldn't be persuaded by that argument.
1. AD HOMINEM - “Against the man” - attacking the person
rather than an idea.
a. While they may make one feel superior, insults are rarely
persuasive
2. BEGGING THE QUESTION - begging the question is a logical
fallacy in which circular reasoning is employed. The
conclusion is assumed to be true in the proof. Basically
begging the question involves taking for granted something
that doesn't need to be proved
a. Examples
i. “The death penalty is a powerful deterrent because
it keeps violent criminals away”
ii. I'm right because i said im right, therefore i'm right
3. SLIPPERY SLOPE - IF a is allowed to happen, then B will
inevitably happen therefore a should not happen.
a. Used alot in politics
4. STRAWMAN - describes a position to someone that doesn't
exist in order to more easily reject it. A
mischaracterization/simplification of another's argument that
is easy to refute.
a. Take things out of context and change your opponent's
argument
5. POST HOC - after this, therefore because of this
a. Everyone who drinks water dies
b. Based on the assumption that chronology equals
causation.
c. Faulty correlations
6. RED HERRING - a diversionary tactic that uses irrelevant
information to distract the audience from the real issue. Bring
something up that is irrelevant to change the topic.
a. Avoid answering the question.
b. Attempts to move focus
7. NON-SEQUITUR - Conclusion does not follow logically
a. Broad statements, “that guy with the sweet gaming pc
must be computer-savvy”
b. Irrelevant info
i. Ones office is the quality of ones teaching ability
8. FAULTY ANALOGY - occurs when two things are offered as
benign similar, when in fact they have little substance in
common
a. Faith is like wifi
i. Wifi = tech and science behind it, no work needed
for it to work most times
ii. Faith = work and practice
9. EITHER OR - sets up an opposition between two EXTREME
options, presenting them as if they were the only options.
a. Ignores middle ground or alternative options
b. Over simplifies
c. Assumes there are only 2 options
10. HASTY GENERALIZATION - failure of inductive reasoning,
hasty generalizations involve jumping to conclusions based
on very little evidence
a. I took 3 math classes and they were boring, therefore all
math classes were boring.
b. This type of thinking underlies all stereotypes
11. GUILT BY ASSOCIATION - the character of your opponent is
tied to the people the opponent is associated with.
a. Guilt is not contagious therefore this is wrong
b. Generally only works with negative things
12. FAULTY APPEAL TO AUTHORITY - this fallacy involves solely
using an authority to support a claim
a. Incorrect as say shaq isn't a doctor
13. FAULTY APPEAL TO TRADITION - same as above, but relies
on tradition alone.
a. I always voted for party x as they have been right in the
past. Party x is now incorrect, but i will still vote because
why change now
14. BANDWAGON - Everyone else is doing it, so should you.
a. International bestseller fallacy
i. Designed to get people to buy them.
15. CREATING FALSE NEEDS - creates a sense of urgency and
need for something the audience doesn't actually need. A
favorite in marketing.
a. Generally slapstick and exaggerated.
16. EQUIVOCATION - literally meaning speaking with two voices,
this fallacy offers when a key term is used in an ambiguous
way, with one meaning in one portion and another in another
portion of the argument.
a. This is usually the result of sloppy thinking about our key
terms.
b. Penguins are black and white, old tv shows are black and
white, therefore some penguins are black and white
17. TWISTING EVIDENCE - uses selected evidence and distorts
evidence.
a. Manufactured evidence
b. Unreliable and insufficient evidence, sites only one source
c. Exaggerated or oversimplified evidence.
7. Organization
a. Three cannons or rhetoric
i. Invention - what you argue
ii. Organizational - how you arrange your argument
iii. Style - how you express the argument
1. Opinion isn't an argument
b. The art of arrangement
i. Essays Are shaped things. Ideas generated and shaped by the human
imagination
ii. Who;e this is more flexible than the canon of invention, the goal is for our
organizational design to be immanent from within the argument
iii. The order of the argument should proceed naturally from the argument
itself. The organizational principle of the argument dwells within the
argument.
1. Argumentative form
a. The model of Classical oration slightly modified
c. A model for Arranging
i. Introduction - leads readers into the essay by establishing the essays
subject focus and argument
1. 5 intro strats
a. Inquisitive - persuades the reader that the subject is a
question to be explored
b. Paradoxical - leads the reader into the essay by asserting
that, although your case seems improbable, it is actually
true.
c. Corrective - persuades readers that the subject has ont
been adequately addressed in the past, an inadequacy
that the essay will remedy.
d. Preparatory - persuades the reader that some unusual
feature of your case is worth attending too
e. Narrative - persuades the reader by providing narrative
detail that leads to the subject at hand
ii. Statement of Circumstance - background the readers needs in order to
situate the argument
1. If your reader is already familiar with the circumstances of the
case, this part may be excluded altogether.
2. What information does your reader need in order to be ready for
your argument?
3. An explanation/exposition of the case at hand
a. Narrate the central events
b. Trace historical precedent
c. Define important terms
d. Articulate crucial questions
iii. Outline - delineates the parts of the proof and refutation so the reader
knows, before beginning, the shape of the essays body
1. Indicates the writer understands and has thought about the shape
of the proof
2. Lets the readers know what to expect, the outline tells the reader
explicitly what the essay will do
3. This can be stated in the thesis/essay map, but also included in
the body of the essay itself/
iv. Proof - body of the essay.
1. Provides your main claims, subclaims, and evidence.
2. This will require an organizational scheme of your own, to be
determined by the needs of the argument.
v. Refutation - arguments presuppose counter-arguments.
1. Use the best most persuasive counter argument that is out there
and refute that
2. Offer your refutation first when the target audience is so hostile to
the argument that you must weaken the readers confidence in his
or her own case before offering an alternative
8. Conclusion
a. Options for conclusion
i. The Summation - briefly summarize the main points of the essay. Tue
them together and discuss the significance of the,. Answer the “so what
questions”
ii. New idea - point to a new but related subject or argument that is
necessitated by your argument but which you don't have time to tackle.
iii. The Full Circle - return to an image, idea, or piece of narrative with which
you began the essay.
9. Paragraph Development
a. Topic sentences
i. The first ingredient of a well-developed paragraph
ii. A topic sentence does more than its name implies. Instead of merely
identifying the topic, a good topic sentence makes a claim about the topic
and states the controlling idea of the paragraph.
iii. Thus a good topic sentence is like a mini thesis statement
iv. As such each topic sentence should be clear, direct, and well-focused.
b. Topic sentences more
i. Because one function of topic sentences is to provide structure, it is
helpful to have topic sentences that echo the language of our thesis
c. Paragraph unity
i. Paragraph unity is achieved when all sentences of the paragraph relate
clearly to the topic sentence
ii. Consider the following paragraph, nothing the relationship of each
sentence to the topic sentence
d. Strengthening paragraph unity
i. Identify the topic sentence
ii. Realt, - read each sentence in a paragraph to determine how it related
directly to the topic sentence
iii. Eliminate any sentence that does not relate to the topic sentence of that
paragraph
iv. Clarify - in a sentence almost related to the topic sentence revise or
delete it
v. Rewrite - if more than one idea is being conveyed in a single paragraph,
either rewrite the topic sentence so that it includes both ideas and
establish a relationship between them or split the single paragraph into 2.
e. Paragraph coherence
i. A coherent paragraph is one in which each sentence relates clearly to the
ones before and after it.
ii. Of paramount importance in paragraph coherence is the logical
relationship between sentences. There should be no leaps each sentence
should connect to on previous and the one following as a link in a chain
f. Levels of specificity
i. One way we can ensure that our paragraphs are coherent is to take care
to comply different levels of specificity in our sentences
ii. Generally, the topic sentence should be the most general sentence in a
paragraph, with succeeding sentences being relatively more specific.
iii. You can chart a paragraphs levels of specificity by applying the numbers
1-5 sentences, with 1 being the most general and 5 being the most
specific
g. Transition words and phrases
i. Transition words and phrases allow us to indicate the logical relationship
of sentences to one another, doing so helps us strengthen paragraph
coheres
1. Additive transitions
a. Indicate transition to other sentences
2. Causal transitions
a. These singnal a cause and effect or reason and result
i. Because, sine owning, as a result, then, if so, in
that case
3. Sequential transition
a. These are used to indicate a chronological or logical
sequence
i. First, secondly, thirdly, subsequently, thus,
consequently.