China Debate Education Network: Elements of Arguments: Linking Evidence to Claims

Movement from Evidence to Claim

Evidence is not the Claim  Evidence is not the same as claim.  Some movement is required to make the “trip” from evidence to claim  That movement involves what we are calling a “link.”

The Nature of Link Links frequently are unstated. Different kinds of links appear in different argument types In fact, the kind of link frequently defines the argument type – Argument by principle – Argument by analogy – Argument by cause and effect

Kinds of Argumentative Links CategoryDefinitionExample Authority Support a claim by associating that claim with the opinion of experts in the field. Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has announced repeatedly that millions in Africa are dying of AIDS. Generalization Create an association between particular examples and a more general rule. I have three debaters who are failing my class, so I am beginning to question how serious debaters are about their classes. AnalogyCreate associations between things that are similar or dissimilar. This kind of link is used to create or criticize claims of similarity. China’s economic power in the twenty-first century will be like America’s in the twentieth century.

Kinds of Argumentative Links CategoryDefinitionExample Causal links Create associations between causes and effects. This kind of link is used to create claims of causal association. Smoking leads to heart disease. PrincipleConnect a particular situation to a general principle. Capital punishment is always unjust because it violates the principle of the right to life. IncompatibilityEvaluate one thing as incompatible with something else. Persons who oppose abortion by arguing that taking a life is immoral are logically bound to oppose capital punishment as well. DissociationCreate new categories by dividing an old category into two new ones. Opposition to abortion is not a matter of a “right to life.” It’s a matter of a right to human life.

Kinds of Links: Authority A positive association between an arguer’s claim and the statement of an authority. What is an authority? – An expert in the field – A recognized expert in a field relevant to the claim. – A trustworthy person

Kinds of Links: Generalization This argument describes an entire group by presenting evidence from specific cases within a group and moving to a general claim about the whole group. Generalization is based on probability Assumptions: – That a sufficient number of examples are presented as evidence. – That the examples are representative of the group.

Kinds of Links: Analogy Makes a claim about one member of a group based on similarity to other members of the same group. Movement is from one specific case to another. 2 Kinds: – That two examples are similar to one another – That two examples are similar in known regards and therefore will be similar in unknown regards. Analogies are descriptive and evaluative.

Kinds of Links: Causality Causes cannot be observed, only inferred. Three ways to infer cause and effect – Absence and presence – Change over time – Correlation – Controlled empirical studies Used to judge actions based on their consequences

Kinds of Links: Principles Unlike the argument of causality, this kind of argument judges an action based on – as the name implies – principles. Three parts: – Select a principle – Argue for the importance of the principle – Apply the contemplated action to the principle Assumptions: – Is the principle sound? Universal? – Does the action apply unambiguously to the principle?

Kinds of Links: Incompatibility A kind of argument used to support an opponent’s argument and thus support one’s own. By showing how 2 views are incompatible, the arguer implies that one must be discarded Different ways incompatibility is used: – Two different statements made in different times and/or places – Views are incompatible with accepted facts and/or values – Refusal to act in this situation is incompatible with our values.

Kinds of Links: Dissociation Starts with a unified concept and divides it into two different concepts Starts with a concept the audience is assumed to value Divides that concept into two new concepts: one of which is valued and one of which is not. The argument by dissociation can thus argue against an argument of incompatibility.