Introduction to Argument and Debate

Argument This lesson will talk about the parts and construction of arguments. When debaters use the term “argument,” it means something different than the normal idea of an argument. We are not talking about a disagreement between two people. In debate, an argument is a specific claim that a debater makes that is supported by evidence and reasoning. In order to be a complete argument, it must have all of those parts: introduce students the components of an individual argument: Data, Warrant, and Claim.

Components of An Argument Claim- the argument you want to make. Debaters call this the “tag” Should be a complete, persuasive sentence Should present the argument and why it matters Example: “The affirmative plan can’t solve: there is no proof that the plan will reduce the risk of war.” Claim- the argument being made. Debaters will refer to this as the “tag”. It should be clear, declarative, and persuasive. It should be a complete sentence. It is important that the claim explains the argument and reason the argument matters. “Impact: Economic downturn leads to war.” “The affirmative plan can’t solve: there is no proof that the plan will reduce the risk of war.”

Components of An Argument Data- the evidence that is read to prove the claim. Written evidence should come from credible, published sources Analytical proof can be based on logic, general knowledge, or evidence already in the debate Data- the information upon which a claim is based. Debaters refer to this as the evidence or proof. Evidence for debates should be from credible, published sources. Debaters will also use “analytics” or analytical arguments based on basic logic, general knowledge, or evidence already in the debate. Remember that it’s always BETTER to provide proof in the form of evidence that you read.   There are a few things to consider when thinking about whether evidence is valid or not: Is the source an established news provider or research institution? Be aware of bias in sources. Know that there are many sources that have specific social, environmental, or political agendas. There are also commercial sites that heavily promote their products or ideas. These can be used as sources, but are susceptible to attacks because of the bias. Is it based on expert information? Good news reporting has to check facts and verify them. Good research institutions have experts that write about their field of study and are peer reviewed. Expert information matters with evidence. Avoid anonymous sources. If you don’t know who published or wrote the information, it’s better to steer clear. This doesn’t mean that you can’t use news sites that credit a “staff writer”, but it does mean that evidence can be questioned or compared to better evidence.

Identifying Valid Evidence Is the source an “established” source? Be aware of “biased” sources. Is the evidence based on “expert” information? Be wary of “anonymous” sources!

Components of An Argument Warrant- the “why” a claim is true. These should be identifiable in the data/evidence Should explain WHY/HOW a claim is true Will be underlined in the evidence. Warrants- the reasons that the claim is true. Warrants should be identifiable within the data/evidence provided. If your claim says that the affirmative plan will improve the economy, you should be able to identify the part of the evidence that says WHY and HOW the affirmative plan will improve the economy.   It is common practice in debate to include longer excerpts from the source and underline and/or highlight the most important sections of the evidence that support the claim. This is done for the sake of time- it keeps debaters from using speech time reading irrelevant parts of the evidence. It is also done for the sake of transparency – it allows all the debaters in a round to see that the evidence is not taken out of context. The parts of the evidence that debaters underline should always include the warrants/reasons that the claim is true.

The “visual” version… CLAIM WARRANT DATA The foundation of the argument is the Data/Evidence, The Claim is the roof of the structure is held up by Warrants which are based on/found in the Data. A claim without warrants doesn’t hold up, and warrants without data have no foundation.   Guided Practice- give students a copy of the “Argument Construction” activity, and allow them to work in pairs or groups to do section 1 in class. In the last few minutes of class, have each pair or group present their best argument to the class

Ways to Answer An Argument “Their argument doesn’t work because……” Attack the source- is it valid, biased, or outdated? Attack the warrants- are they missing or unclear? Read The Evidence- look for: “Qualifiers” or conditions “might”, “could”, “should”, “probably”, “if”, “when”, “under certain circumstances”. Look for “Reservations”- gives exclusions “unless”, “except”, “is doubtful”. Try to find an “Opposite Example” Provide an example of an existing situation that proves the opposite of the claim.