Elements of Argument The Toulmin Model

Toulmin’s Basic Argument Model A claim Based on evidence of some sort A warrant (rule) that explains how the evidence supports the claim Backing supporting the warrants Qualifications and rebuttals or counter arguments that refute competing claims

Figure 1 Qualification Evidence Claim Warrant (Rule) Rebuttals Backing

Claim A Claim is the proposition or thesis (or viewpoint, or opinion) that you are trying to prove. For a claim to be validated, it MUST be supported by evidence. Simply feeling that something is true is not enough for a formal argument

Evidence Examine data Ask questions based on data Reexamine data Try to answer the questions Data that supports our claim= Evidence

Warrants Simply common sense rules that people generally accept as true. Laws, scientific principles or studies, thoughtfully argued definitions. The warrant explains why the evidence supports the claim.

“Slip or Trip” Group Work Assignment Do you think Queenie is telling the truth? Find all the evidence that indicates whether or not Queenie is telling the truth. Make a list of all the evidence. Evidence includes concrete, observable information; personal testimony; written documents; and material objects and their condition or appearance. Next explain how each piece of evidence supports your claim. Each explanation will be a generally accepted rule, which may begin with the phrase “As a rule…” Be prepared to explain why your evidence supports your case.

Individual Report When you’ve finished discussing the previous slide with your group members, you’ll need to prepare your own individual report on the evidence. Address: 1. What you found when you arrived at the home of Arthur and Queenie Volupides. 2. What Queenie said in her statement. 3. What did the autopsy find? 4. Whether the evidence supports Queenie’s statements 5. Your conclusions and recommendations for future investigations 6. Explanation of evidence supporting your conclusions and recommendations. (Evidence, Warrants)

Backing In Toulmin’s terms, backing is the support for the warrants. In arguments of judgement, warrants need to be backed by extended definitions of the abstract qualities involved. For example, different people define “courage” differently. Arguments of policy involve warrants about what is permissible and appropriate in certain circumstances. These also involve extended definitions. For example, court cases often turn on definitions of the principles underlying the right to freedom or the right to privacy.

Qualifications and Counter Arguments Because arguments deal with probabilities, they must be qualified. Qualifiers: probably, very likely, almost certainly, as a rule, beyond reasonable doubt Because we are dealing with arguments of probability, differing claims are likely to exist. Counterarguments are built to refute a specific claim.