The toulmin method of argument A Visual Explanation : A tool for diagramming “informal arguments”

Stephen Toulmin, originally a British logician, is now a professor at USC. He became frustrated with the inability of formal logic to explain everyday arguments, which prompted him to develop his own model of practical reasoning. Stephen Toulmin

6 CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL The toulmin method: QUALIFIER CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method: 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

The 3 basic elements Claim: (assertion or proposition) Grounds: (proof, grounds, support) Warrant: (inferential leap) The 3 basic elements

A claim is the point an arguer is trying to make A claim is the point an arguer is trying to make. The claim in the conclusion, proposition, or assertion an arguer wants another to accept. The claim answers the question, “So, what’s the point?” Example: “Rosario is an American citizen, because she was born in the United States.” Example: Barack Obama doesn’t wear a flag pin on his lapel, so he must not be patriotic.” Step 1: Claims

There are 4 different types of CLAIMS: Fact: claims which focus on verifiable information Judgment/value: claims involving opinions, attitudes, and subjective evaluations of things Policy: claims advocating courses of action that should be taken Definition/classification: indicates what criteria are being used to define a term or what category something falls into. There are 4 different types of CLAIMS:

AKA Argument, Assertion CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Step 1: The Claim AKA Argument, Assertion This is just what it sounds like. It is the assertion being made by the speaker. The claim answers the question, “So what’s your point?” Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher You should send Mimi a birthday card

Grounds (Proof or Data) Grounds refer to the proof or evidence an arguer offers. Grounds can consist of statistics, quotations, reports, findings, physical evidence or various forms or reasoning. Grounds (Proof or Data)

6 Step 2: The Grounds The toulmin method AKA Evidence, Data CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Step 2: The Grounds AKA Evidence, Data Without some kind of grounds, the claim is unfounded. It is just an unsubstantiated opinion without the support of evidence. Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher; I say this because several of his students were sleeping today when I passed his classroom. This always has a because in it. Sometimes it is explicitly stated. Sometimes it’s implied. CLAIM

6 Step 2: The Grounds she sent you one. The toulmin method CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Step 2: The Grounds *AKA Evidence, Data, Proof * Without some kind of grounds, the claim is unfounded. It is just an unsubstantiated opinion without the support of evidence. Answer the questions “How come,” “Why,” or “What’s your proof?” Can be statistics, quotations, reports, findings, physical evidence, or various forms of reasoning. Mr. Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher because…. several of his students were sleeping today. You should send Mimi a birthday card because… she sent you one. CLAIM

Other examples of GROUNDS: “It looks like rain. The barometer is falling. “The other Howard Johnson’s restaurants I’ve been in had clean restrooms, so I’ll bet this one has clear restrooms too.” Grounds answer questions such as: “What is your proof?” “How do you know?” “Why?” Other examples of GROUNDS:

6 Step 2: The Grounds The toulmin method AKA Evidence, Data CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Step 2: The Grounds AKA Evidence, Data Without some kind of grounds, the claim is unfounded. It is just an unsubstantiated opinion without the support of evidence. Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher; several of his students were sleeping today. This always has a because in it. Sometimes it is explicitly stated. Sometimes it’s implied. CLAIM

6 Step 2: The Grounds The toulmin method AKA Evidence, Data CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Step 2: The Grounds AKA Evidence, Data Without some kind of grounds, the claim is unfounded. It is just an unsubstantiated opinion without the support of evidence. Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher; several of his students were sleeping today. This always has a because in it. Sometimes it is explicitly stated. Sometimes it’s implied. When analyzing an argument’s effectiveness, the first step is looking at the evidence presented. Is it viable? Does it provide enough verifiable data to support the claim? CLAIM

6 Step 3: The Warrant The toulmin method AKA Assumption CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Step 3: The Warrant AKA Assumption This is what the speaker assumes the audience will agree with him on. The inferential leap. In this case, the speaker assumes that his audience will agree with that a teacher who puts students to sleep is a bad teacher. A second warrant in this argument may be that only a bad teacher would allow his students to sleep in class. Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher; several of his students were sleeping today. Any teacher who puts students to sleep should find another line of work. CLAIM GROUNDS

6 Step 3: The Warrant The toulmin method AKA Assumption CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Step 3: The Warrant AKA Assumption This is what the speaker assumes the audience will agree with him on. In this case, the speaker assumes that his audience will agree with that a teacher who puts students to sleep is a bad teacher. A second warrant in this argument may be that only a bad teacher would allow his students to sleep in class. Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher; several of his students were sleeping today. Any teacher who puts students to sleep should find another line of work. But is that a safe assumption on the part of the speaker? Are there potentially mitigating circumstances that would render his assumption false? The warrant is usually where an argument succeeds or fails, because the audience either agrees with the speaker’s reasoning or doesn’t. CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT

Warrants provide a “linking function” by establishing a mental connection between the grounds and the claim: “Muffin is running a temperature. I’ll bet she has an infection.” Warrant: reasoning, a fever is a reliable sign of an infection. That dog is probably friendly. It is a Golden Retriever. Warrant: generalization; most or all Golden Retrievers are friendly. More WARRANTS

Warrants can be based on… Ethos: source credibility, authority Logos: reason-giving, induction, deduction Pathos: emotional or motivational appeals Shared Values: free speech, right to know, fairness, etc… Note: these categories aren’t mutually exclusive; there is considerable overlap among the three Warrants can be based on…

6 The toulmin method Claim Grounds Warrant CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT By now, you should see that the Toulmin Method is a set of supports, a set of metaphorical building blocks. Claim Grounds Warrant CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT

6 Step 4: The Backing The toulmin method CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Step 4: The Backing The backing is a widely-held truth or belief. That means it doesn’t have to be true. It just has to be agreed-upon by most of the speaker’s audience. Christopher Columbus had difficulty obtaining financial backing because his argument’s backing was laughable. Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher; several of his students were sleeping today. Any teacher who puts students to sleep should find another line of work. Anyone who won’t do their job deserves to lose it. Taken out of context, any reasonable person would agree with that last sentence. And that is what a backing is: a statement that everyone agrees on. CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT

6 Step 4: The Backing The toulmin method CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Step 4: The Backing The backing is a widely-held truth or belief. That doesn’t mean it has to be true. It just has to be agreed-upon by most of the speaker’s audience. Christopher Columbus had difficulty obtaining financial backing because his argument’s backing was laughable. Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher; several of his students were sleeping today. Any teacher who puts students to sleep should find another line of work. Anyone who won’t do their job deserves to lose it. Taken out of context, any reasonable person would agree with that last sentence. And that is what a backing is: a statement that everyone agrees on. CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING

6 The toulmin method Claim Inductive Reasoning Grounds Warrant Backing CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Inductive Reasoning The Toulmin Method employs inductive reasoning. From the grounds to the warrant to the backing, it moves from the specific to the general. Did you notice? Claim Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher Several of his students were sleeping today Any teacher who puts students to sleep should find another line of work. Anyone who won’t do their job deserves to lose it. Grounds Warrant Backing

(Deductive reasoning moves from the general to the specific.) CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Inductive Reasoning Level 1: Very specific Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher; several of his students were sleeping today. Level 2: More General Any teacher who puts students to sleep should find another line of work. Level 3: Wide-ranging Anyone who won’t do their job deserves to lose it. In an effective application of the Toulmin Method, the Warrant cannot refer back specifically to the subject of the Claim & Grounds. The Backing must become still more general, usually employing a universal or national sense of focus. (Deductive reasoning moves from the general to the specific.)

You can say he’s senile, but that’s no excuse. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Step 5: The Rebuttal The rebuttal is simple. This is where the speaker anticipates possible criticism of his argument and refutes it. In fact, Aristotle called this the Refutatio. Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher; several of his students were sleeping today. Any teacher who puts students to sleep should find another line of work. Anyone who won’t do their job deserves to lose it. You can say he’s senile, but that’s no excuse. Having one or more rebuttals can make an argument more effective by effectively ‘cutting off the legs’ of the opposing argument before it is implemented. CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING

You can say he’s senile, but that’s no excuse. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Step 5: The Rebuttal The rebuttal is simple. This is where the speaker anticipates possible criticism of his argument and refutes it. In fact, Aristotle called this the Refutatio. Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher; several of his students were sleeping today. Any teacher who puts students to sleep should find another line of work. Anyone who won’t do their job deserves to lose it. You can say he’s senile, but that’s no excuse. Having one or more rebuttals can make an argument more effective by effectively ‘cutting off the legs’ of the opposing argument before it is implemented. CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL

6 Step 6: The Qualifier The toulmin method CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Step 6: The Qualifier The rebuttal makes an argument less absolute. Words like “probably”, and “most” are qualifiers. On first glance, one might think this would reduce the effectiveness of an argument. In fact, the opposite is often true. I think Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher; several of his students were sleeping today. Any teacher who puts students to sleep should probably find another line of work. Anyone who won’t do their job deserves to lose it. You can say he’s senile, but that’s no excuse. Politicians use qualifiers to great effect. It allows them to deny having even made the argument, if the tide of opinion shifts. Note: Not all arguments – not even all effective arguments – have a qualifier. CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL

6 Step 6: The Qualifier The toulmin method CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Step 6: The Qualifier The rebuttal makes an argument less absolute. Words like “probably”, and “most” are qualifiers. On first glance, one might think this would reduce the effectiveness of an argument. In fact, the opposite is often true. I think Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher; several of his students were sleeping today. Any teacher who puts students to sleep should probably find another line of work. Anyone who won’t do their job deserves to lose it. You can say he’s senile, but that’s no excuse. Politicians use qualifiers to great effect. It allows them to deny having even made the argument, if the tide of opinion shifts. Note: Not all arguments – not even all effective arguments – have a qualifier. CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL

Can you apply the Toulmin Method to them? CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Here are five example arguments. Can you apply the Toulmin Method to them? The Baltimore Parakeets are the best team in football. They scored the most points in the league last year by far. The Dallas Cowgirls are the best team in football. They won the Super Bowl. Tiger Woods is the greatest athlete of all time. He has earned more money then anyone. Breyers ice cream is the best, because they use all natural ingredients. The Expendables is a pretty good film. It has so many action stars in it! CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

6 The toulmin method 1 CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT 1 Claim: The Baltimore Parakeets are the best team in football. Grounds: They scored the most points in the league last year by far. Warrant: The football team that scores the most points is the best team. Backing: Whoever scores the most is the best. Rebuttal: They didn’t win the championship. CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

6 The toulmin method 2 CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT 2 Claim: The Dallas Cowgirls are the best team in football. Grounds: They won the Super Bowl. Warrant: The NFL team that wins the Super Bowl is the best team. Backing: The winner of a championship is the best participant. Rebuttal: They had an easy schedule. CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

6 The toulmin method 3 CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT 3 Claim: Tiger Woods is the greatest athlete of all time. Grounds: He has earned more money then anyone. Warrant: The athlete that earns the most money is the best. Backing: Money represents success. Rebuttal: Players from earlier eras didn’t have the opportunities that Woods Has had. CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

6 The toulmin method 4 CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT 4 Claim: Breyers ice cream is the best, because Grounds: they use all natural ingredients. Warrant: Natural ingredients make ice cream taste better Backing: Foods with preservatives and artificial flavorings don’t taste as good (inversion) Rebuttal: Other ice creams last longer in the freezer. CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

6 The toulmin method 5 CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT 5 Claim: The Expendables is a pretty good film. Grounds: It has so many action stars in it! Warrant: Lots of stars make a film better. Backing: People who are successful in their field are more likely to create a viable product. Rebuttal: The script stinks. Qualifier: “pretty good” CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

Is it valid, according to toulmin? CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Here’s one you might be familiar with… Is it valid, according to toulmin? Take out the trash. Why? Because I said to, that’s why! Take a few minutes and apply the Toulmin Method to it. CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

Can you apply the Toulmin Method to them? CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF The toulmin method 6 STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Can you apply the Toulmin Method to them? Claim: You should take out the trash. Grounds: Because I told you to. Warrant: I provide you with a clean home, food, schooling and meet all your needs. I have done so for your entire life. Small chores are hardly a dent in the debt you owe me. Backing: People should repay their debts. Rebuttal: But I’m an angry teenager. I have angst! It’s valid. CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

The toulmin method argument Now, let’s look at a student sample and apply the Toulmin Method to it. Claim: Grounds: Warrant: Backing: Rebuttal: of The toulmin method argument By Frank Clarke

Claim: You should let me pierce my “smiley” Ground 1: It isn’t visible Ground 2: You have allowed me to get visible piercings in the past. Ground 3: You consider me responsible and cleanly Ground 4: I take good care of my current piercings.

Claim: You should let me pierce my “smiley” Ground 1: It isn’t visible Ground 2: You have allowed me to get visible piercings in the past. Warrant 1 – If a piercing isn’t visible parent’s should allow their teens to get them. Backing – Parents who have already allowed their teens to have visible piercings should be okay with allowing teens to get hidden ones.

Claim: You should allow me to pierce my “smiley” Ground 3: You consider me responsible and cleanly Ground 4: I take good care of my current piercings. Warrant 2 – If teens take care of themselves and their responsibilities, parents should allow them to get piercings. Backing - Any teen who has a prove track record or responsibility and cleanliness should be allowed to get piercings.