A Visual Explanation By Frank Clarke

STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF Professor Peppenfeffer is a bad teacher; several of his students were sleeping today. several of his students were sleeping today. CLAIM

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF 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

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF 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

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF 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

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF 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

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF 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

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT Grounds Warrant Claim

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF 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

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF 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

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? CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF Grounds Warrant Backing Claim

STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Inductive Reasoning CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF 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

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF 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

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF 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

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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF 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

STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT 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! CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT 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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT 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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT 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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT 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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT 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” CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT Take out the trash. Why? Because I said to, that’s why! Take a few minutes and apply the Toulmin Method to it. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

STEPS TO AN EFFECTIVE ARGUMENT 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. CLARKE’S EXPLANATION OF CLAIM GROUNDS WARRANT BACKING REBUTTAL QUALIFIER

A Visual Explanation By Frank Clarke The End