The Structure of an Argument Every argument consists of three parts….

1. The CLAIM The Death Penalty deters crime. The CLAIM is the statement being offered as true. Synonyms: assertion, statement, argument The Death Penalty deters crime.

2. The DATA States that use the death penalty have lower crime rates. The DATA is the information being offered in support of the claim.. Synonym: Evidence Examples: Statistics, Quotes from experts, factual examples States that use the death penalty have lower crime rates.

3. The WARRANT The WARRANT is the link in thought between the evidence and the claim. It is your REASON for WHY you argument stands. TYPES: There are five types of reasoning: Example Causal Authority Sign Analogy My reasoning is Causal. I claim that lower crime rates were directly CAUSED BY the use of the death penalty.

All 3 parts together… CLAIM: The Death Penalty deters crime. DATA: Many states that use the death penalty have lower crime rates. WARRANT: My reasoning is Causal. I claim that lower crime rates were directly CAUSED BY the use of the death penalty.

All 3 parts together… CLAIM: Our economy is not heading toward a recession. DATA: Unemployment is dropping. Housing starts are rising. Interest rates are stable. WARRANT: My reasoning is Sign. I claim that these are the factors which show that we are not in a recession.

All 3 parts together… CLAIM: Excessive video game playing does not cause violent behavior.. DATA: My brother plays games constantly and is never violent. WARRANT: My reasoning is Example. I claim that because the claim is true for my brother, it is true for everyone.

All 3 parts together… CLAIM: Allowing cell phones in class is bad for education. DATA: Rockwood disallows cell phones and often has good test scores. WARRANT: My reasoning is Analogy. I claim that because it was good for Rockwood, it will be good for Parkway.

Our debatable questions… Should we have year round schooling? CLAIM: Yes, because students are more likely to retain the information. DATA: The more often we are exposed to something, the more likely we are to remember it. WARRANT: Since it is proven that repetition and exposure increase retention, the fewer breaks we have from schools will increase our retention rates.

FIVE TYPES OF REASONING

Inferring general conclusions from specific cases. Reasoning by EXAMPLE Inferring general conclusions from specific cases. Claim: Wal-Mart stores benefit the community. Evidence: Little Rock, Arkansas Stamford, Mass. Reasoning: Since it benefited in those places, it will likely benefit elsewhere.

therefore it is always true.” Reasoning by EXAMPLE Inferring general conclusions from specific cases. “My claim was true in A, B, C, and D, therefore it is always true.”

CHALLENGES to use against this type of reasoning: Reasoning by EXAMPLE CHALLENGES to use against this type of reasoning: Is the example relevant? Are there enough examples? Are the examples typical or representative? Do the examples cover a critical period of time? Can negative examples be explained?

Reasoning by ANALOGY Inferring that because a claim is true in one situation, it will be true in this other similar situation. Claim: “Open campus” would work at West Evidence: It would at West because it works at Clayton HS. Reasoning: West and Clayton are similar enough that the comparison works.

Reasoning by ANALOGY Inferring that because a claim is true in one situation, it will be true in this other similar situation. “Situation A is enough like situation B, that we are able to say that what happened in A will also happen in B.”

CHALLENGES to use against this type of reasoning: Reasoning by ANALOGY CHALLENGES to use against this type of reasoning: Are there significant points of similarity? Are the points of similarity critical to the comparison? Are there any relevant differences? Are only literal analogies used as logical proof?

Inferring that a certain factor directly resulted in another factor. CAUSAL reasoning Inferring that a certain factor directly resulted in another factor. Claim: Listening to sexually explicit lyrics in music results in higher rates of sexual activity among teens. Evidence: Teen sexual activity has increased. Reasoning: The cause of increased sexual activity is explicit lyrics.

Inferring that a certain factor directly resulted in another factor. CAUSAL reasoning Inferring that a certain factor directly resulted in another factor. A = B

CHALLENGES to use against this type of reasoning: CAUSAL reasoning CHALLENGES to use against this type of reasoning: Is the cause-effect relationship relevant? Do other causes also produce the effect? Is the cause capable of producing the effect? Is the cause being mistaken for the effect? Is the relationship correlation rather than causal? Can the effect exist without the cause?

Reasoning by SIGN Inferring that the presence of signs indicate the presence of another factor. Claim: West is an excellent school. Evidence: High # of National Merit Winners High % of grads go to college Excellent faculty Wide range of activities for students Reasoning: These mean West is Best!

“A, B, C, and D are signs that overall we are seeing X.” Reasoning by SIGN Inferring that the presence of certain signs indicate the presence of another factor. “A, B, C, and D are signs that overall we are seeing X.”

CHALLENGES to use against this type of reasoning: Reasoning by SIGN CHALLENGES to use against this type of reasoning: Is the relationship between factors just incidental? Do counter-signs exist? Are there enough signs to draw a conclusion?

Reasoning by AUTHORITY Inferring that a claim because an expert says it is true. Claim: Smoking is hazardous to your health. Evidence: The Surgeon General warns that cigarettes are bad for you. Reasoning: The Surgeon General is the highest authority on the subject making it true.

Reasoning by AUTHORITY Inferring that a claim because an expert says it is true. This source says “A.” Therefore A must be true.

Reasoning by AUTHORITY CHALLENGES to use against this type of reasoning: Is the authority qualified on the issue? Is the authority trustworthy? Is the authority unbiased?

“AUTHORITY=PLUS” In debate, we are ALWAYS giving SOURCES for all of our evidence. So, we are ALWAYS using reasoning by authority in combination with other forms of reasoning. External refutation--attacks the source. Internal refutation--attacks the source’s reasoning.

Trying it out Get into groups of three. You will act out your given scenario. You will have time to prepare the scene. Make sure all people have their arguments heard. Make sure that you can identify the claims, the evidence, and the reasoning for each argument.

Scenario #1 John, Paul, George, and Ringo sit down to talk about which cities should be included in their next band tour. They each seem to have their own agenda about where they should go.

Scenario #2 Spongebob, Patrick, and Squidward are bored. Bob wants to go to the Crusty Crab. Patrick is distracted and wants to play in Jellyfish fields. Squidward wants to be left alone to play his clarinet. They must try to convince the others to do their activity.

Scenario #3 Tony LaRussa can’t decide who should be the starting pitcher for the first playoff game, Adam Wainwright or Chris Carpenter. He decides to let each player have time to make their case on why they should be the starter, and then he will use that to make up his mind.

Scenario #4 Steven Tyler, JLo, and Randy want America to pick the BEST American Idol: Kelly Clarkson or Carrie Underwood. Each will each have equal time to argue in favor of their choice for the winner. Based solely upon these arguments, the viewing audience will vote online or by toll-free call, and their vote will determine the winner.

Scenario #2 The format for American Idol has been altered slightly. Simon, Kara, and Randy will each have ten minutes to argue in favor of their choice for the winner. Based solely upon these arguments, the viewing audience will vote online or by toll-free call, and their vote will determine the winner.

Scenario #4 Dwight loves Angela. Andy loves Angela. Angela cannot decide which office romance she prefers. Each man must make their case before she makes a decision.

Scenario # 5 You need next Friday off of work so you can go to a debate tournament, but your co-worker needs off for a family vacation. Your boss listens to both sides before making a decision.