Structuring and Analyzing Arguments: The Classical, Toulmin, and Rogerian Models

1
Structuring and Analyzing Arguments The
Classical, Toulmin, and Rogerian Models

• Source JGlass

2
Key Terms Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning

• Deductive Reasoning in traditional Aristotelian
  logic, the process of reasoning in which a
  conclusion follows necessarily from the stated
  premises inference by reasoning from the general
  to the specific
• Inductive Reasoning the process of reasoning
  from the specific to the general, in which the
  premises of an argument are believed to support
  the conclusion but do not ensure it. Inductive
  reasoning is used to formulate laws based on
  limited observations of recurring patterns.

3
Key Terms The Syllogism

• Three-part deductive argument, in which
  conclusion follows from two premises
• A straightforward example
• Major premise All people have hearts.
• Minor premise John is a person.
• Conclusion Therefore, John has a heart.

4
Classical Argument

• Began in ancient Greece, approximately fifth
  century B.C.
• Communicated orally and designed to be easily
  understood by listeners
• Based on formal logic, including the syllogism
• Six main components

5
Classical Argument Six Elements

• 1) Introduction captures attention of audience
  urges audience to consider your case
• 2) Statement of Background narrates the key
  facts and/or events leading up to your case
• 3) Proposition states the position you are
  taking, based on the information youve already
  presented, and sets up the structure of the rest
  of your argument
• 4) Proof discusses your reasons for your
  position and provides evidence to support each
  reason
• 5) Refutation anticipates opposing viewpoints
  then demonstrates why your approach is the only
  acceptable one (i.e. better than your opponents)
• 6) Conclusion summarizes your most important
  points and can include appeals to feelings or
  values (pathos)

6
The Toulmin Model

• Developed by British philosopher Stephen Toulmin
  in the 1950s
• Emphasizes that logic often based on probability
  rather than certainty
• Focuses on claims
• Three primary components

7
Toulmin Model Three Components

• Three components
• Claim the main point or position
• Data the evidence supporting the claim, aka the
  reasons
• Warrant an underlying assumption or basic
  principle that connects data and claim often
  implied rather than explicit

8
Toulmin Model An Example

• Claim My parents should allow me to go to my
  friends party on Friday night.
• Data The parents of nearly all of the juniors
  at UHS have given their children permission to
  attend this party.
• Warrant My parents should act in accordance
  with the other parents of juniors at UHS.

9
Uh-oh, a potential snag

• What if my parents dont buy my warrant?
  What if they dont think they should necessarily
  do what other parents are doing?
• How can I still get permission to attend the
  party? Or at least have a better chance of
  getting permission?

10
Try new data and a new warrant.

• What might be more convincing data for an
  audience of parents?
• What might be a warrant that most parents will
  share?

11
Toulmin Argumentation in More Detail
12
Rogerian Model

• Developed by psychologist Carl Rogers (also in
  the 50s)
• Emphasizes problem-solving and/or coming to
  consensus
• Allows the author to appear open-minded or even
  objective
• Appropriate in contexts where you need to
  convince a resistant opponent to at least respect
  your views

13
Rogerian ArgumentsStructure

• Introduction statement of problem to be solved
  or question to be answered
• Summary of Opposing Views described using a
  seemingly objective persona
• Statement of Understanding concedes
  circumstances under which opposing views might be
  valid
• Statement of Your Position
• Statement of Contexts describes contexts in
  which your position applies/works well
• Statement of Benefits appeals to self-interest
  of readers who may not yet agree with you
  demonstrates how your position benefits them