Persuasion and Responsibility: Analyzing Arguments Chapter 3 Persuasion and Responsibility: Analyzing Arguments

Overview This chapter will help you: Understand argumentative writing Analyze issues Develop a persuasive position on an issue Plan convincing arguments Negotiate differences with others

What is Argument? It’s not just a heated conversation over the best “team.” It refers to a type of persuasive writing designed to present your views, with support.

Exchange of Letters See the exchange of letters between Darcy and Mr. Boldt, pages 59-61. First, read Darcy’s letter to her state representative. She is a stay-at-home mom, asking him to support funding for a program that has helped her family. Unfortunately, the program is in danger of losing its funding.

Exchange of Letters, cont. Next, read Mr. Boldt’s letter back to her; how does he respond to her concerns? What is the issue that they disagree on? What is your impression of these two people? Which one’s argument seems more persuasive to you, and why? See the questions on page 61.

Four Parts of an Argument An argument has four components: A clear statement of the writer’s position on the issue, which is also called the claim Evidence that supports the claim (statistics, research, expert testimony, and examples) Clear explanations of how this evidence supports the claim A statement of the implications of the claim See pages 62-64 for an annotated student paper example.

Analyzing Controversial Issues Entering a controversy is like coming into a room where people are having a heated debate, so before you jump in, you need to first listen and sort out people’s views. Then you can begin to speak. We generally enter controversies through our relationships with others, and our response reveals a relationship too.

Three Kinds of Issues One: issues of substantiation Two: issues of evaluation Three: issues of policy See page 65 for an example of how the three issues can be used to explore a controversy. Notice how the sample includes a look at all three types of issues.

Issues of Substantiation The first kind of issues refer to questions of disputed facts, definitions, causes, and consequences. They can be supported or refuted using available evidence. See page 66 for a list of examples of issues fitting this category.

Issues of Evaluation The second kind of issues are based on evaluation—whether something is good or bad, right or wrong, of value or worthless. Support will rely on a value judgment. For example, should you buy an iMac desktop, or Gateway or Dell laptop? See page 67 for examples of issues that fit this category.

Issues of Policy The final category of issues are based on policy, so they are claims that propose or endorse policy. Claims will then focus on what we should do about a problem. Support will focus on how well the policy solves the problem. Claims use words such as “should, ought, or must” (67) in their wording, to show the best solution to the problem. See page 67 for more examples and details.

Taking a Position Also called a rhetorical stance The point is to clarify your own thinking and determine where you stand, and then find evidence to support your position.

Possible Stances, or Positions We agree with the argument We provide support for it, with facts or other evidence We provide a counterargument

Three Kinds of Rhetorical Appeals These are tools you use to persuade your listener or reader: Ethos (ethics) Pathos (emotion) Logos (logic) The chapter uses a brief passage from “The Ballot or the Bullet” by Malcolm X to look at these three tools.

Ethos (ethics) An ethical appeal means to look at what is right or wrong. These workers are fighting for fair wages and appealing to the ethos of their boss.

Pathos (emotional) An emotional appeal could be a sad story to promote a fundraiser. It could be a salesman saying how good you look in that little red sports car!

Logos (logical) A logical appeal is one that is based on factual evidence alone. This tool depends on an almost mathematical approach: if 2 plus 2 equals 4, then…so, no emotion or ethics.

Back to the Parts of an Argument Arguments include: Claim (your position) Evidence (the supporting material) Assumptions (the line of reasoning that shows how the evidence supports the claim)

Parts of an Argument, cont. Backing: Reasons showing the assumption is valid Differing views: Disagreements with all or part of your argument Qualifiers: Words that modify the claim

What’s a Claim? A claim is a point that can be argued, and reveals a position on an issue. People make claims and try to support them; this is like two lawyers who present cases in court.

Evidence, or Backing You back up your arguments with evidence and explanations that show an argument is valid and reliable.

Five questions about evidence Is the evidence clearly related to the claim? Do you have enough evidence? Can you verify it? Is it up to date? Does it come from reliable sources? See the box on page 82.

What Counts as Evidence? Statistics Research Expert testimony Examples The text refers you back to Chapter Two for a review.

Assumptions An assumption is the link between evidence and a claim; it explains how the evidence supports the claim. Assumptions are not usually directly stated, but implied; they reflect our core beliefs. See pages 78-79 for examples of the assumptions used by two students asked to evaluate a teacher.

Handling Differing Views How do you handle differing views? You need to be fair and accurate when summarizing them. When you do so, you show your readers that you’ve done your homework.

Options of Handling Differing Views Refuting: Explain what is wrong with a view Conceding: Agree or acknowledge that part of the differing view has merit Negotiating: Find points of agreement

Refuting Views When you refute views, you explain why you cannot agree with them. The textbook says “your best chance of persuading readers…is to clarify the differences that divide you and explain what you see as the weaknesses in other lines of reasoning” (p. 81).

Conceding Views If a differing view has merit (value or truth), you should acknowledge that fact. See page 82 for a list of words that signal concession. This includes: admittedly, granted, while it may be true, and despite the fact.

Negotiating Differing Views Sometimes you can find points of agreement between your views and those of others. You may see this as compromising, but it can also mean finding new solutions and perspectives (p. 82).

Qualifiers These are words that modify or limit claims, which means you don’t make sweeping statements that can be challenged. For example, not: All students with cell phones cheat on tests. Instead: Some of the students with cell phones have used them to cheat on tests. Other qualifiers: many, often, frequently, probably, perhaps, may, might, sometimes.

Examples of Qualifiers Many college students feel it is not fair for an athlete to get a full ride scholarship. Frequently, teenagers and elderly drivers are involved in fatal car crashes. Race may be used as a factor in college admissions; however, it is only one of many things that colleges look at in reviewing a student’s application. Do you see how the qualifier keeps the statement from becoming a generalization?

Sample Argument See pages 83-85 for a sample argument that has been dissected to show you the various parts. This is an argument about school uniforms that looks at differing views, considers evidence, assumptions, and qualifiers. Going through this process helps the student to more fully examine her argument.

Pro/Con: Argument as Debate Television talk shows and political debates frequently treat arguments as something that has two sides. One is pro, or for, an issue (school uniforms, for example), while the other is con, or opposed to it. So you’re either for it or against it.

So What? Watch shows that feature these debates, and you see lots of lively gestures and hear polished speeches, but not much gets resolved. What do we need to do to get some action?

Pro/Con Limits Discussion First, it creates an adversarial (we’re enemies) atmosphere. Second, it polarizes issues (we’re miles apart). Finally, it makes it difficult to find common ground. However, there are ways to deal with this problem.

Three Approaches Dialogue with others—listen to their views, and put yourself into their shoes. Recognize ambiguities and contradictions; be willing to see the gray areas. Locate common ground.

An Exchange of Views Online See page 89 for two messages posted online that illustrate the concept of the importance of opening a dialogue. Both writers tell a story and share their experiences, and ask for understanding. (Do you have any idea what it’s like…?) Skim over the messages; see the questions on page 90.

Chapter Readings There are a couple of ads that promote a position on an issue. Glance through these examples to get an idea of the strategies they are using. Each is followed by a list of questions, For Critical Inquiry.

Advertisement from NY Times The ad (page 92) from the NY Times asks for action from its readers. They want to support the United Nations in its efforts to stop executions, in order to avoid putting to death an innocent person; the letter is signed by a number of famous people. The actual Call for a Moratorium is on the next page.

Sample Rhetorical Analysis The essay analyzes the argument about the proposed moratorium; it’s found on pages 94-96. Notice how it is marked up (or annotated) to show you the various components of the argument.

Writing Assignment Your task is to write an essay that analyses a short argument. More details are found on pages 96-97; your instructor will let you know whether your class will be doing this particular assignment, and provide you with additional guidelines.

In Closing We don’t always agree on important issues. However, when we don’t, we need to support our views with evidence, and respect others’ views too.

Student Companion Website Go to the student side of the Web site for exercises, chapter overviews, and links to writing resources for this chapter: http://college.hmco.com/pic/trimbur4e