Argument Writing: Concepts and Terms
Ad hominem: This is an attack on the character of a person rather than her/his
opinions or arguments. Example: "Who cares if the French oppose invading Iraq; they
haven't won a war in centuries!"
Ad populum: This is an emotional appeal that speaks to positive (such as patriotism,
religion, democracy) or negative (such as terrorism or fascism) concepts rather than the
real issue at hand. Example: "Sony. Ask anyone."
Analogy:
an extended comparison between that which is unfamiliar to something
familiar for the purpose of illuminating the unfamiliar.
Appealing to Authority: Invoking authority as the last word.
Appealing to Emotion:
Appealing to Force:
Using emotion as proof.
Using threats to establish the validity of the claim.
Appeals:
Resources writers draw on to connect and persuade readers (i.e. ethos,
pathos, logos).
Arguing from Ignorance: Arguing that a claim is justified because its opposite
cannot be proved.
Argument:
A mode of writing intended to win the reader’s agreement. An element
of discussion and deliberation, activities that suggest group inquiry and a combined
effort to arrive at deeper understanding, stronger resolution, and better decisions.
Differs from persuasion by the fact that its goal is to discover truth versus changing
someone’s point of view.
Argument of Policy:
A series of argument to persuade the reader to take a
specific action to eliminate or ameliorate a problem related to policy (i.e. city council,
Congress, editorial). Participants may agree there is a problem, they disagree about the
action to take.
Assumption:
a belief accepted as true and on which other claims are based.
Compiled by Elizabeth Nelson 2011
Authority:
knowledgeable about subject
Background:
Backing:
information a writer provides to create the context for an argument.
the evidence provided to support a warrant.
Bandwagon:
An “everyone else is doing it” appeal.
Begging the Question:
Making a claim and producing arguments that do not
support the claim. It directly presumes the conclusion which is at question in the first
place. This can also be known as a “Circular Argument.” Example: “Paranormal
phenomena exist because I have had experiences that can only be described as
paranormal.”
Call for Action:
An effective call for action shows that there are problems
significant enough to warrant the change, even if that change causes inconvenience and
costs money.
Causal Argument:
An argument that explains the effects of a cause or the cause
of an effect.
Ceremonial Argument:
Addresses questions of praise and blame (i.e. grad
speech or eulogy).
Circular Argument: This restates the argument rather than actually proving it.
Claim: This is another word for thesis or proposition.
It answers the question: “What
point will this paper try to make?” or “What opinion is this author defending?”
Connotation:
Context:
Associations that extend beyond the literal.
the entire situation in which the writing takes place (purpose, audience,
influences).
Conviction:
belief that a claim is reasonable.
Compiled by Elizabeth Nelson 2011
Contradiction:
Presenting information that contradicts a claim.
Counterclaim: The opposing position to the argument’s claim.
Criterion:
the standards in evaluative arguments by which everything is measured to
determine quality or value.
Deductive: A process through which the claims provide conclusive proof for the
conclusion. This method of reasoning goes from general to particular.
Either/or Reasoning:
Making an assumption that a reality can only be divided in
two parts or extremes.
Enthymeme:
Pattern of rhetorical reasoning in a text that links a claim to a
supporting reason. Cousin to the syllogism, but differs in two ways: (1) starting point is
an assumption that the writer presumes the audience accepts and that the writer can
build upon, (2) Because the writer presumes that the audience believes and accepts the
assumption, that part of the argument is frequently not stated directly or explicitly.
Example: All those who are equally responsible by law for their actions should receive
equal rights under the law (this may not be universally accepted). Sojourner Truth has
been called upon to take responsibility for her actions. Therefore, Sojourner Truth
should receive the same rights as men do under the law.
Epistemology:
The branch of philosophy concerned with the limitations of
knowledge. It addresses the questions: What is knowledge? How is knowledge
acquired? How do we know what we know? Focus is on analyzing knowledge and how it
relates to truth, belief, and skepticism about different knowledge claims.
Equivocation:
fallacy in which a lie is misrepresented as truth.
Ethos: An appeal to ethics through competence and reliability.
It is the self-image a
writer creates to define a relationship with readers through authority or credibility.
Evading the Issue: Talking around the issue rather than addressing it.
Evidence and Reasons: Something that furnishes proof.
The factual basis for an
argument. Supports both the warrant and the claim. May include personal experience,
anecdotes, facts, or authorities.
Compiled by Elizabeth Nelson 2011
Example:
Writer provides instances of a general idea.
Fact Argument:
An argument in which the claim can be proven with evidence or
testimony.
Fallacies:
Errors in reasoning.
False Analogy:
Comparing unmatched elements.
False Cause: Crediting an effect to a cause without evidence.
Generalization:
This is a conclusion based on insufficient or biased evidence.
Gray:
The complexity of the issue in an argument resides in the gray areas. If you reduce an
argument to black and white or right and wrong, you only have a position. You cannot take a
dogmatic stance or you risk showing that you don’t understand the issue.
Grounds:
The evidence used to support a claim.
Hasty Generalization:
Drawing a conclusion from too few examples.
Ideational Argument Epistemology:
Emphasis is on developing ideas and using
argument to develop ideas. Focus on classroom discussion and original ideas.
Inductive: A process through which the claims provide some basis for the conclusion.
This process of reasoning to conclusion looks at members to draw conclusions about an
entire class.
Inherency:
refers to a barrier that keeps a harm from being solved in the status quo.
Judgment Argument:
An argument on the attribution of a quality or
characteristic to a person, group, object, or concept (i.e. Does life begin at conception or
only after birth? Can education be separate and still be equal for all?).
Compiled by Elizabeth Nelson 2011
Line of Argument:
strategy used in argumentation such as ethos, pathos, and
logos.
Logos: An appeal to reason through facts, statistics, quotes, data, etc.
Metacommentary:
Telling an audience how to interpret something you have said
or written. In an argument, it is a way of telling your reader how to think about and
process your claims or even how NOT to think about them. In argumentation, you make
and support claims, but you also guide the reader in how to think about the evidence
and claims.
Necessary Reason:
Non sequitar:
A cause that has to be present so an effect will occur.
“it does not follow.” A conclusion is made that does not follow from
the premise.
Oversimplification:
Supplying a neat and easy explanation for something more
complicated.
Pathos: An appeal to emotion through vivid language, imagery, and tone.
Persuasion:
A mode of writing intended to influence people to change their mind
or point of view. Potentially, there is a power dynamic in which one person is not aware
of the argument.
Plain Folks:
Using average folks to make an appeal that they are just like us.
Poisoning the Well: Overly committed to one position and explaining everything
in light of that position.
Policy Argument:
Arguments that typically make a case to establish, amend, or
eliminate rules, procedures, practices, and projects that are believed to affect people’s
lives.
Post hoc:
Making the assumption that because B follows A, B was caused by A.
Compiled by Elizabeth Nelson 2011
Precedents:
Premise:
Past decisions or actions that establish patterns for future actions.
A proposition or assumption that supports a conclusion.
Propaganda:
Purpose:
Advancing a point of view without reason or truth.
Your goal in writing the argument (i.e. inform, convince, explore…).
Qualifiers:
Usually adverbs that modify the verb in the claim or adjectives that
modify a key noun (i.e. typically, usually, some, few, sometimes) in order to clarify the
claims and protect credibility. Qualifiers are used to place limits on claims.
Qualitative:
Relies on criteria such as precedent, logic, tradition, and reason.
Quantitative:
Reason:
Relies on criteria that can be counted or measured.
A statement that expands the claim by giving evidence in support.
Rebuttal: Disarming the opponents’ argument by disproving the validity of the
counterclaim.
Red herring: This is a diversionary tactic that avoids the key issues, often by
avoiding opposing arguments rather than addressing them. Usually a detail or remark
inserted into a discussion, either intentionally or unintentionally, that sidetracks the
discussion.
Rhetoric:
The art of using language effectively.
Rhetorical Analysis:
an examination of how the elements of an argument work
together to persuade.
Rhetorical question:
a device of argumentation or persuasion. A question is
posed for effect. Its intent is to provoke thought. It is not intended to be answered.
Significance of the Evaluation:
attention?
Compiled by Elizabeth Nelson 2011
What is at stake? Why does it deserve
Slippery Slope: a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably
follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question.
Example: "We've got to stop them from banning pornography. Once they start banning
one form of literature, they will never stop. Next thing you know, they will be burning all
the books!"
Social Argument Epistemology:
Emphasis is on social engagement and
interactions among students to encourage involvement in larger, social conversations.
Solvency:
the effectiveness of the plan in solving the problems of the status quo.
Stock Issues:
An approach in which one considers the need for change and
proposes a solution that will eliminate or significantly reduce the negatives that define
the need, after first considering the central policy question. A call for action that would
change the status quo is the trigger for the debate.
Stance:
the writer’s attitude toward the topic and the audience.
Straw Man: This move oversimplifies an opponent's viewpoint and then attacks
that hollow argument. Usually a person simply ignores the person's actual position and
substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.
Example: "Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine program. I
disagree entirely. I can't understand why he wants to leave us defenseless like that."
Support:
Is evidence and backing. This might be examples, facts and data that aid in
proving the claim's validity. Depending on whom your audience is, it may include
emotional appeals, quotations from famous people or recognized experts, or
statements based on the writer’s personal credibility. The support in an argument
answers questions about the claim such as “How do you know this is true?” and “What
is your opinion based on?”
Syllogism:
A three-step form of reasoning that employs deduction. Major premise
that is irrefutable. Minor premise that falls under the general category. Conclusion that
logically follows from the major and minor premises.
Example: All humans are mortal. Socrates is human. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
Testimony:
Personal experience or observation used to support an argument.
Compiled by Elizabeth Nelson 2011
Textual Argument Epistemology:
Emphasis is on terminology and concern for
structure and form.
Thesis:
The central idea in which everything else refers. The writer’s point.
Time Crunch:
Creating the impression that immediate action is needed or the
opportunity will be lost.
Warranting:
The assumption or principle that connects the data to the claim. The
statements and facts that justify a belief or action. They may be inferences or
assumptions that are taken for granted by the writer (and sometimes by the argument).
Warrants connect (conspicuously or inconspicuously) the claim and the support; they
derive from our cultural experiences and personal observations. A clear warrant is
essential. The warrant is the value that gives your claim the right to exist. It says, “you
can disagree with my opinion, but know it has merit.” It is the underlying principle.
Claim: Don’t eat that plant.
Reason: It’s poisonous
Warrant: What is poisonous should not be eaten.
Hillocks, Jr., G. (2011). Teaching Argument Writing Grades 6-12. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Lunsford, A. A., Ruszkiewicz, J. L., & Walters, K. (2007). Everything's an Argument (fourth ed.).
Boston, MA: Bedford St. Martin's.
Newell, G. E., & Bloom, D. (November 18, 2011). What Counts as Argumentative Writing:
Constructing Definitions of Argumentative Writing in the High School Language Arts
Classroom. Chicago, IL: NCTE Annual Convention.
Smagorinsky, P., Johannessen, L. R., Kahn, E. A., & McCann, T. M. (2011). Teaching Students to
Write Argument. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Compiled by Elizabeth Nelson 2011