The Little Red Schoolhouse
Session Six
Arguments
4
Page 204
Introduction
Focus
The University of Virginia
Little Red Schoolhouse
University of Virginia
Arguments
Page 205
Structure of Arguments
Coherent Documents
Tell a STORY . . .
in order to make an ARGUMENT . . .
in order to solve a PROBLEM . . .
and produce an OUTCOME.
University of Virginia
Little Red Schoolhouse
6
6
Page 206
Arguments
What Readers Need to Create Coherence
Answers to Four Questions
Question 1: What’s the Story?
What characters should I look for?
Readers create coherence when they see a text as developing a story line (or a
couple of related story lines). In order to build a coherent story, readers need to
know from the start who will be its main character(s).
Question 2: What’s the Argument?
What concepts should I look for?
Readers create coherence when they see a text as developing an argument (or a
couple of related arguments). In order to build a coherent argument, readers
need to know from the start which will be its central concept(s).
Question 3: What’s at Stake?
What problem or question will this resolve?
Readers create coherence when they see a text as resolving a problem (or a
couple of related problems). In order to see all of the elements of a text as
contributing to resolve a problem, readers have to know from the start what is
the problem.
Question 4: What’s the Point?
What is the most important idea, claim, recommendation?
Readers create coherence when they see all the elements of a text as subordinate
to some Point. In order to relate those elements to the Point, they have to know
what it is, preferably from the start.
◊◊◊
Little Red Schoolhouse
University of Virginia
Arguments
Page 207
Structure of Arguments
Question for Coherence 1: What’s the Argument?
What concepts and logic should I look for?
Readers create coherence when they see a text as developing an argument (or a
couple of related arguments). In order to build a coherent argument, readers
need to know from the start which will be its central concept(s).
Language of Argument
Suppose you’ve made an argument that Student Government should take your
position on a controversial issue. But someone else made an argument opposite
to yours. How might you report that event to your friends?
1.
How would you tell your friends about the person who made the other argument?
“I made my case, but some guy opposed me.”
a)
b)
c)
2.
What would you say about the two arguments if SG accepted your position?
“He did his best to oppose me, but I won.”
a)
b)
c)
3.
What would you say if one person in SG continued to resist your argument?
“I won over most of them, but one guy just dug in his heels.”
a)
b)
c)
4.
What would you say if the other person offered weak claims you were able to rebut?
“He was pretty slippery, but I pinned him down.”
a)
b)
University of Virginia
Little Red Schoolhouse
6
6
Page 208
Arguments
Language
c)
◊◊◊
Little Red Schoolhouse
University of Virginia
Arguments
Page 209
Structure of Arguments
The Five Questions of Argument
1. What do you think?
elicits
Claim
2. Why do you say that
elicits
Reasons
3. How do you know?
elicits
Evidence
4. Why do you think your reason
supports your claim?
elicits
Warrant
5. But what about this
alternative claim/reason/
evidence/warrant?
elicits
Acknowledgement &
Response
Claim: A statement made to resolve a problem by motivating others to act or think in
ways they otherwise would not. Claims are always in question.
Reasons: statements made to support a claim. Reasons are always in question: they
represent the arguers contestable judgments about the states of affairs that make a claim
acceptable. Reasons interpret, generalize from, or highlight aspects of evidence.
Evidence: Statements (or other representations) of states of affairs that are not in
question (at least for the purposes of the argument) and that make reasons and claims
acceptable. Evidence almost always involves representations of states of affairs.
Warrants: Statements of general principles of reasoning that connect certain kinds of
reasons with certain kinds of claims. Warrants are often drawn from familiar
background knowledge shared by the participants in an argument, but they can also be
principles articulated for the first time. Warrants are most effective when they don’t
have to appear on the page.
Acknowledgment and Response: Statements that acknowledge alternative claims,
reasons, evidence, or warrants that do not support the claim in question. Responses can
reject the alternative summarily, argue against it, or indicate the degree to which the
alternative reduces the acceptability of the claim. Responses are optional.
University of Virginia
Little Red Schoolhouse
6
6
Page 210
Arguments
Structure of Arguments
The Five Parts of Argument (Plus One)
1. Claim: a statement that is
• Not obvious or otherwise already known.
• Contestable.
• Supportable with evidence.
2. Reasons: statements that
• Explain why you think your claim should be accepted by you and by your readers.
• Represent judgments that you assume are not shared by readers.
3. Evidence: statements that
• Describe or otherwise represent facts about the world that are assumed to be shared with
readers (‘You could look it up’).
• Will not be questioned by readers, at least not for the moment.
• Note: evidence is comprised of representations of states of affairs that are treated, for the
sake of the argument at hand, as external, foundational facts.
4. Warrants: general principles that
• Assert a principled connection between a kind of reason/evidence and a kind of claim.
• Have two components, a reason/evidence side and a claim side.
• Are normally assumed rather than stated.
• Represent shared beliefs and values without which an argument cannot get off the
ground.
5. Acknowledgment & Response
Acknowledgments: statements that
• Raise or refer to alternative claims, reasons, evidence, or warrants.
• Locate an argument in a field of possible arguments.
• Show readers that you have not ignored their concerns.
Responses: statements that
• Accept or reject an acknowledged alternative.
• Offer arguments or mini-arguments against an alternative.
• Explain the complications and limits of your argument.
+1. Qualifications: words, phrases, and occasionally sentences that
• Specify degrees of certainty, limits on the sufficiency or quality of evidence, etc..
Little Red Schoolhouse
University of Virginia
Arguments
Page 211
Structure of Arguments
• Limit the range of a claim.
• State conditions required for a claim to apply (excluding ceteris ceteribus clauses
concerning obvious conditions that go without saying).
• Show readers your sense of the reliability and range of applicability of your argument.
University of Virginia
Little Red Schoolhouse
6
6
Page 212
Arguments
Structure of Arguments
Warrant
Claim
because of
Reason
based on
Evidence
Acknowledgment & Response
What is your basis
for connecting those
reasons to that claim?
What are you
claiming?
What reasons do you
have for claiming that?
What evidence do you
base your reasons on?
on?on?
But what about these plausible
alternatives — this other evidence,
reason, warrant. o r claim?
◊◊◊
Little Red Schoolhouse
University of Virginia
Arguments
Page 213
Structure of Arguments
You Don’t Need to Win an Argument to Succeed
Because Arguments Solve Problems, They Have Many Goals
The Venerable Bede recounts the story of St. Augustine’s arrival in Kent, and his
reception at the court of King Aethelbert, AD 597:
When, at the king’s command, they had sat down and preached the word of life to the king and his court, the
king said: “Your words and promises are fair indeed; they are new and uncertain, and I cannot accept them and
abandon the age-old beliefs that I have held together with the whole of the English nation. But since you have
traveled far, and I can see that you are sincere in your desire to impart to us what you believe to be true and
excellent, we will not harm you. We will receive you hospitably and take care to supply you with all that you
need; nor will we forbid you to preach and win any people you can to your religion.
Nine Degrees of Acceptance
1. Reader, I want you to accept, believe, and act on my claim wholeheartedly.
2. Reader, I want you to accept my claim.
3. Reader, I want you to accept my claim, at least for this specific purpose.
4. Reader, I want you to acknowledge that my claim is one you could
accept, even if you are not now prepared to do so.
5. Reader, I want you to accept that my argument is a good one, even if you
cannot fully accept my claim.
6. Reader, I want you to accept that, even if you do not accept my claim,
others would have good reason for doing so.
7. Reader, I want you to acknowledge that my claim is supported by a
coherent and reasonable argument.
8. Reader, I want you to acknowledge that my claim is supported by an
argument that others might find coherent and reasonable.
9. Reader, I want you to acknowledge that you at least understand my
reasons for making my claim.
When we think of arguments not as a battle that we win or
lose, but as an ordinary exchange in which reader and
writer seek the best solution to a problem, then we can
count as success outcomes less than the total capitulation
of the reader.
University of Virginia
Little Red Schoolhouse
6
6
Page 214
Arguments
Arguments
Assertions, Arguments, and Warranted Arguments
In an assertion, you make a statement that you implicitly claim is true.
Y is so.
Claim
A. Today, Lincoln is revered as one of America’s most admired historical figures, but at the
time, he was not a popular President.
B. Although the Cinderella characters are known for their beauty and kindness, their weakness
is troubling.
In an argument, you make a statement that you claim is true, and you state the
evidence that you believe should lead your reader to accept the truth of your
claim.
Y is so.
Claim
because
X is true
Evidence
A. Today, Lincoln is revered as one of America's most admired historical figures, but at the time,
he was not a popular President. Many newspapers brutally attacked him for mismanaging
the war.
claim Lincoln was not a popular President.
evidence Many newspapers brutally attacked him for mismanaging the war.
B. Although the Cinderella characters are known for their beauty and kindness, their weakness
is a troubling echo of the worst chauvinist stereotypes. It is only through magic that these
submissive females find the strength to achieve their goals.
Little Red Schoolhouse
University of Virginia
Arguments
Page 215
Arguments
claim The weakness of the Cinderella characters is a troubling echo of the worst chauvinist
stereotypes.
evidence It is only through magic that these submissive females find the strength to achieve
their goals.
University of Virginia
Little Red Schoolhouse
6
6
Page 216
Arguments
Arguments
Assertions, Arguments, and Warranted Arguments —
An argument is warranted when the relationship between a claim and its
evidence is supported by a general principle (sometimes unstated) that is
accepted as true and that includes all relevant elements of the claim and the
evidence. Think of a warrant as a conceptual bridge that establishes the
connection between a claim and its evidence:
General
Principle Z
Warrant
Y is so.
because
Claim
X is true
Evidence
Even in the simplest arguments, when your claim is supported by good evidence,
there is some general principle — a warrant — that explains why that evidence
should count in support of that claim.
claim It must have rained last night.
Why do you think that? (That is, what is your evidence?)
evidence The streets are wet this morning.
What makes you think that wet streets should count as evidence of rain. (That is, what is you
warrant?)
warrant Wet streets are always a good sign of rain.
You can state warrants in many ways, but the most useful is to state it as a twopart sentence, with one part that talks about the kind of evidence you have and
one part that talks about the kind of claim you want to make:
When/if we have evidence of kind X, we can make a claim of kind Y.
warrant If streets are wet in the morning, we can conclude that it probably rained the night
before.
In an argument this simple, about a matter we know so well, the connection
between the claim and its evidence is so obvious you would never state it. If you
did, your listeners might be offended that you assumed they did not know this
obvious principle. But when you make claims in your papers, especially when the
claims are strong enough to be interesting, your readers might not always see so
Little Red Schoolhouse
University of Virginia
Arguments
Page 217
Arguments
quickly why your evidence supports those claims — and sometimes you may not
be so clear on exactly what connects them.
University of Virginia
Little Red Schoolhouse
6
6
Page 218
Arguments
Arguments
Assertions, Arguments, and Warranted Arguments —
You need not explicitly state in your paper every warrant that connects your
claims and evidence, but it is a good idea to check each of the most important
claims in your paper: What is my warrant? What general principle do I believe
and expect my readers to believe that connects my particular claim to my
particular evidence? Once you can state your warrant for yourself, then you can
decide whether your readers already know and share this general principle, in
which case you do not need to say it in your paper. If, however, your readers may
not know and believe this general principle, then you need to tell them what it is.
A. Today, Lincoln is revered as one of America's most admired historical figures, but at the time,
he was not a popular President. Many newspapers brutally attacked him for mismanaging
the war.
claim Lincoln was not a popular President.
evidence Many newspapers brutally attacked him for mismanaging the war.
warrant When Presidents are brutally attacked by many newspapers, they are unpopular.
B. Although the Cinderella characters are known for their beauty and kindness, their weakness
is a troubling echo of the worst chauvinist stereotypes. It is only through magic that these
submissive females find the strength to achieve their goals.
claim The weakness of the Cinderella characters is a troubling echo of the worst chauvinist
stereotypes.
evidence It is only through magic that these submissive females find the strength to achieve
their goals.
warrant Because magic is no substitute for personal strength in achieving goals, when a story
portrays a young woman as needing magic to succeed in life, then that story
perpetuates the worst chauvinist stereotypes.
An effective argument includes a claim that is not
obvious, the evidence that leads readers to accept the
claim, and a (sometimes implicit) warrant stating a
general principle that relates the evidence to the claim.
◊◊◊
Little Red Schoolhouse
University of Virginia
Arguments
Page 219
FFA
AQ
Qss
?
“You say that we should think of arguments as cooperative efforts at
problem solving and not battles. But most of the arguments I see in print
look like battles to me.”
We are misled about the nature of arguments in two ways. First, because we think of
arguments as battles, we tend to notice only those that seem to look like battles,
ignoring all those instances of arguments that are not combative. If you make an effort
to notice all the arguments you read, not just the nasty ones, you’ll find both that
arguments are more common than most of us think and that the nasty ones are not
really in the majority.
Second, even those arguments that seem to be battles are often cooperative efforts at
problem solving, with an overlay of fire and spice. Many arguments that attack an
opponent’s position are not really aimed at persuading those with the opposing position
to change their minds (since they hardly ever do); instead, those arguments are really
aimed at third parties who don’t have a fixed position. The arguer hopes that by
attacking another’s position, she can deter those who have not yet decided from
adopting that position. And even when an arguer does need to change the mind of those
he attacks, he still needs their cooperation to solve his problem. An attack is seldom an
effective way of changing minds, but that is what the arguer needs to do. Those who try
to persuade through attack would do better to think about their underlying goal of
cooperative problem solving. Of course, some nasty exchanges are really just forms of
coercion: “Do what I say or I will humiliate you in public.” Needless to say, these may
look like arguments, but in fact they are not.
?
“Warrants are hard. Do I really need them?”
Warrants are hard. It’s not always easy for us to understand the principles
underlying our own reasoning, much less to explain them to others. But to the degree
that you can figure out the principles you reason by, you’ll be in a better position to
trust your own beliefs and the arguments you make to support them.
Another problem with warrants is that we hardly ever state them explicitly. You’d
would never be done with an argument if you had to state all of the principles behind it.
So the challenge is to know when you do need to add a warrant to your arguments. In
general, your readers will look for warrants whenever the cannot see why a reason
supports a claim (or evidence supports a reason). Your problem is to be able to predict
when that might happen—which is, of course, hard because you will be too close with
your own beliefs and doubly hard when you are not very close to your reader’s beliefs.
That’s why experienced writers always try to find surrogate readers, especially when
they are not very familiar with their real readers.
University of Virginia
Little Red Schoolhouse
6
6
Page 220
Arguments
FFA
AQ
Qss
LR
Little Red Schoolhouse
S
University of Virginia