1
Stephen Toulmin’s Terms of Argument
“Argumentation is the art of influencing others, through the medium of
reasoned discourse, to believe or act as we wish them to believe or act.” A
distinction is sometimes made between argument and persuasion. Most scholars
believe that argument depends mainly on logical appeals. Persuasion depends mainly
on ethical and emotional appeals. The difference is one of emphasis. In real-life
arguments about social policy, the distinction is hard to measure. So, the term
argument may be used to represent forms of discourse that attempt to persuade the
readers or listeners to accept a claim, whether acceptance is based on logical or
emotional appeals or, more commonly, both. Argument may be defined alternatively as
“a statement or statements offering support for a claim.”
A popular form of argument is the Toulmin model (Other forms include classical
and Rogerian.). This model is named after Stephen Toulmin, who in The Uses of
Argument proposed that every good argument has six parts. The first three are
essential to all arguments. They include:
1. the claim,
2. the support, and
3. the warrant.
Arguments may also include overtly, and sometime tacitly, three additional elements:
4. the backing,
5. the rebuttal, and
6. the qualifier.
Consider the following conversation.
“I really don’t think that Larry can do the job. He’s pretty dumb.”
“Really? I thought that he was smart. What makes you say he’s dumb?”
“Did you hear that he’s illiterate - can’t read above third-grade level? In my
book that makes him dumb.”
2
Put into outline form, the warrant or assumption in the argument becomes clear.
CLAIM:
Larry is pretty dumb.
EVIDENCE: He can’t read above third-grade level.
WARRANT: Anybody who can’t read above third-grade level must be dumb.
The argument represented in diagram form shows the warrant as a bridge
between the claim and the support (evidence).
Support
Claim
Warrant
(Expressed or unexpressed)
The argument above can be written like this:
Support
Larry can’t read
above third-grade
level.
Claim
He’s pretty dumb.
Warrant
Anybody who can’t read above thirdgrade level must be pretty dumb.
3
The full argument structure may be diagrammed as follows:
Qualifier (Q)
Data (D)
Claim (C)
Restriction (R)
Warrant (W)
Backing (B)
Let’s look at a somewhat less frivolous example, adapted from Toulmin (1964
111).
Qualifier (Q)
Data (D)
almost certainly
Claim (C) Peterson is not Roman Catholic.
Peterson is a Swede.
Restriction (R)
Warrant (W)
unless he has converted
A Swede can be taken to be almost
certainly not a Roman Catholic.
Backing (B)
The proportion of Roman Catholic
Swedes is less than 2%.
The argument may be written thusly:
If Peterson is a Swede, so Peterson is not Roman Catholic, since a Swede can be
taken to be almost certainly not a Roman Catholic, because the proportion of Roman
Catholic Swedes is less than 2%.
4
The Claim
The claim is the main point of an argument, and answers the question, “What are
you trying to prove?” or “What do I want to prove?” Synonyms for “claim” are thesis,
proposition, conclusion, main point. Like the thesis, it may be explicit or implicit (stated
or implied). The claim organizes the entire argument and everything else in the
argument is related to it. The best way to check your claim during revision is by
completing the statement: “I have my audience to think that … .”
Kinds of claims
1. Claims of fact assert that a condition has existed, exists, or will exist, and are
based on data or facts that the audience will accept as being objectively
verifiable (empirical evidence).
e.g., The present cocaine epidemic is not unique. From 1885 to the 1920s
cocaine was as widely used as it is today.
Horse racing is a dangerous sport.
California will experience colder, stormier weather for the next ten years.
2. Claims of value attempt to prove that some things are more or less desirable
than others. They express approval or disapproval of standards of taste and
morality. They include advertisements, reviews. They argue about what is good
or bad, beautiful or ugly.
e.g.,
You have a tasteful writing style.
“Bob Cooper hangs his heart on his sleeve as he attempts to mend his
broken family -and put some fun in dysfunction -before he dies. Cooper's
authenticity is palpable and it anchors the piece from beginning to end”
(Robin Waples, Review of Last Christmas).
Football is one of the most dehumanizing experiences a person can face
(Dave Meggyesy, Linebacker for the St. Louis Cardinals).
5
3. Claims of policy assert that specific policies should be instituted as solutions to
problems. The expressions should, must, or ought to usually appear in the
statement.
e.g.,
Prisons should be abolished because they are crime-manufacturing
concerns.
Our first step must be to immediately establish and advertise drastic
policies to bring our population under control (Paul Ehrlich, biologist).
Major employers must consciously employ more women in major positions
of responsibility, and pay them according to their position rather than their
sex.
Support
Support supplies the evidence, opinions, reasons, examples, and factual
information about the claim that make it possible for the reader to accept it, used by the
arguer to convince an audience that his or her claims are sound. Synonyms include
proof, evidence, reasons, and data. To plan support, ask, “What information do I need
to supply to convince my audience of my main point (claim)?” Common types of
support include:
1. facts and statistics, testimony from experts,
2. opinions (authoritative and personal), Caution, personal opinion should be
convincing, original, impressive, interesting, and backed by factual knowledge,
experience, good reasoning and judgement.
3. examples in the form of anecdotes, scenarios, and cases,
4. emotional appeal made to the values and attitudes of the audience.
To help you focus on and recognize the support, complete this sentence: “I want my
audience to believe that … [the claim] because … [list the support].”
Warrant
Warrants are assumptions, general principles, conventions from specific
disciplines, widely held values, commonly accepted beliefs, and appeals to human
motives.
Warrants originate with the arguer, but exist in the minds of the audience. They
can be shared or in conflict.
6
Warrants may be implicit (hidden, implied) or explicit (overtly stated), but either
way they are part of the argument. They are often taken for granted. They allow the
reader to make a connection between the support (or data) and the claim.
Example 1: Claim - Abortion should be illegal.
Data - “Thou shalt not kill.”
Warrants - a.) abortion is a sin, b.) life begins at conception, c.) human
potential is lost.
Example 2: Claim - Adoption of a vegetarian diet leads to a healthier and longer life.
Support - The authors of Becoming a Vegetarian Family say so.
Warrant - The authors are reliable sources of information on diet. (Note
that the author of the claim may need to provide proof of the authors’ credentials in
science and medicine, in case the reader thinks they are quacks.)
In this case, if the reader does not accept the warrant, he or she cannot accept
the claim.
Example 3: Claim - Laws making marijuana should be repealed.
Support - People should have the right to use any substance they wish.
(Note that we could have included medical evidence that show that marijuana is
harmless. In this case the warrant would be different.)
Warrant - No laws should prevent any citizens the right from exercising
their rights. (Note also that definitions may also be used as warrants. But again, if the
definition is not accepted then the claim resulting from it cannot be accepted either.)
Backing
Backing is additional evidence provided to support or “back up” a warrant
whenever there is a strong possibility that your audience will reject it.
When writing your argument, determine if backing is needed by identifying the
warrant and then determining whether or not you accept it.
Rebuttal
A rebuttal established what is wrong, invalid, or unacceptable about an argument
and may also present counter-arguments, or new arguments that represent an entirely
different perspective or point of view on the issue.
7
Ask yourself, “What are the other possible views on this subject?” and “How can I
answer them?”
When analysing claims, look for phrases like “some may disagree,” others may
think,” or other opinions that are commonly held are” followed by the opposing idea.
Qualifier
An argument cannot be expected to demonstrate a certainty. Usually it only
establishes probability. Therefore, avoid presenting information as an absolute or a
certainly. Qualify what you say with phrases such as “very likely,” “probably,” “it seems,”
Summary
D
DATA (if): The observations, facts, raw material from which we draw a claim.
Includes examples, evidence, quotes from literature (in literary analysis).
C
CLAIM (therefore, so, then): The opinion that results from the data, our
understanding of the meaning of the data.
Q
QUALIFIER (on the whole, usually): Indicates or signals that the claim is not
absolute.
R
RESTRICTION (except when): Indicates conditions that would render the claim
totally invalid.
W
WARRANT (since, because): The reason(s) why our claim is valid, including
definitions, experience, similarities to other systems, argument patterns.
B
BACKING (on account of): Beliefs which authorize the warrant at the outset,
basic understandings of larger principles.
References
Rotenberg
Toulmin, S. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press,
1964.
Woods, Nancy, Perspectives on Argument.
[ToulminExplanation.docx]