FORMAL ARGUMENT

NOTES

Sources:

Stuart Hirschberg, Essential Strategies of Argument. New York: Allyn & Bacon.

Annette Rottenberg, Elements of Argument: a Text and a Reader. Boston: Bedford/St Martin’s

Defining argument:

Argumentation seeks to convince others to accept the proposition it puts forth.

• Sometimes distinctions are made between argument and persuasion:
  • Argument is seen to rely primarily on the use of logic to make its case
  • Persuasion is seen to rely primarily on the use of emotion and morality to make its case

As a rule, one can say that argument is employed primarily in writing, and persuasion in oratory. However, in real life, both logical and emotional appeals are used to sway people’s minds.

For the purposes of this course, formal argument will be grounded primarily in logical appeals, though it may draw support and power from emotional appeals. Students are encouraged to focus on developing logical appeals.

Terms of argument:

CLAIM:

The proposition of the argument, the point you are trying to prove. Usually the claim is explicitly made in the thesis statement of the essay.

There are three main types of claims:

Causal/Factual – sometimes separated, but very closely connected. These examine the causes of conditions that exist, and aim to show why or how those conditions came into being.

Rottenberg gives the following examples:

The present cocaine epidemic is not unique. From 1885 to the 1920s, cocaine was as widely used as it is today.

Horse racing is the most dangerous sport.

California will experience colder, stormier weather for the next ten years.

Such claims must be supported by specific data.

Value – these aim to prove that something is better or more worthy than another thing, or to measure the success of some event. Critical analyses, and reviews in general, are value claims. So are arguments about morality. The language in which they are expressed is often comparative or evaluative: better than, best, excellent, poor, the most, the least.

Rottenberg’s examples:

The opera Tannhauser provides a splendid viewing as well as listening experience.

Football is one of the most dehumanizing experiences a person can face. – Dave Meggyesy

Ending a patient’s life intentionally is absolutely forbidden on moral grounds. – Presidential Commission on Medical Ethics, 1983

Policy claims – these make recommendations or suggest solutions to problems. They are distinguishable because of the language that they contain: should, must, ought to. To make a policy claim, first a fact must be established (a causal/factual claim must be made), and then an evaluative analysis must be conducted (a value claim must be made). Finally, a recommendation must be made.

Rottenberg’s examples:

Prisons should be abolished because they are crime-manufacturing concerns.

Our fist step must be to immediately establish and advertise drastic policies designed to bring our own population under control. – Paul Ehrlich, biologist

The New York City Board of Education should make sure that qualified women appear on any new list of candidates for Chancellor of Education.

SUPPORT:

Any claim you make must be backed up with evidence and motivational appeals. Evidence consists of facts, statistics, expert testimony, observations, and personal experience. Motivational appeals are directed at the audience’s attitudes and morals, to try and persuade them to accept the validity of the claim.

WARRANT:

The warrant is the assumption or principle on which your claim is based. The warrant ensures the reliability of the claim you have made, and helps to establish common ground between the reader and the writer. Warrants may be explicit, or they may be implied. Warrants help to ground the argument. If one is writing for an audience that will share the assumptions on which your argument rests, the warrant may be implicit in the claim. For example, the claim

Murderers should be punished to the full extent of the law

rests on the assumption that the taking of another human life is the most serious crime imaginable; most modern societies would agree, and therefore the warrant may remain unstated.

On the other hand, the claim

A person who takes a life should be put to death

may require a more explicit statement of the warrant. It is entirely conceivable that several members of one’s audience might hold the assumption that human life is so sacred that no one but God should take it, and that capital punishment, even in the case of murder, is unacceptable.

Also crucial to good argument is the writing of clear prose. Thus the following must receive close attention:

Definition

Language

Logic