Transparency Masters - Pearson

ARGUMENT

Copyright © 1995–2007 by Pearson Education, publishing as Longman Publishers Fowler/Aaron, The Little, Brown Handbook, Tenth Edition

Questions for Critically Reading an Argument ➤ What claims does the writer make? ➤ What kinds and quality of evidence does the writer provide to support the claim? ➤ What assumptions underlie the argument, connecting evidence to claims? ➤ What is the writer’s tone? How does the writer use language? ➤ Is the argument logical? Has the writer committed any fallacies? ➤ Are you convinced? Why or why not?


9.1

EVIDENCE FOR ARGUMENT ➤Facts Verifiable statements

➤Statistics Facts expressed in numbers

➤Examples Specific cases

➤Expert opinions The judgments of authorities

➤Appeals to readers’ beliefs or needs


9.2

CRITERIA FOR WEIGHING EVIDENCE ➤Is the evidence accurate? Trustworthy, exact, undistorted?

➤Is the evidence relevant? Authoritative, pertinent, current?

➤Is the evidence representative? True to context?

➤Is the evidence adequate? Plentiful, specific?


9.3

GUIDELINES FOR ANALYZING ASSUMPTIONS ➤What are the assumptions underlying the argument? How does the writer connect claims with evidence?

➤Are the assumptions believable? Do they express your values? Do they seem true in your experience?

➤Are the assumptions consistent with each other? Is the argument’s foundation solid, not slippery?


9.4

CHECKLIST OF FALLACIES Evasions  Begging the question – Treating an opinion that is open to question as if it were already proved or disproved.

 Non sequitar (“it does not follow”) – Drawing a conclusion from irrelevant evidence.

 Red herring – Introducing an irrelevant issue to distract readers.

 False authority – Citing as expert opinion the views of a person who is not an expert.

 Inappropriate appeals – Appealing to pity or fear, snob appeal, bandwagon, flattery, argument ad populum (“to the people”), argument ad hominem (“to the man”)


9.3a

CHECKLIST OF FALLACIES Oversimplifications  Hasty generalization (jumping to a conclusion) – Asserting an opinion based on too little evidence.

 Sweeping generalization – Asserting an opinion as applying to all instances when it may apply to some, or to none. Absolute statements and stereotypes are variations.

 Reductive fallacy – Generally, oversimplifying causes and effects.

 Post hoc fallacy – Assuming that A caused B because A preceded B.

 Either/or fallacy (false dilemma) – Reducing a complicated question to two alternatives.

 False analogy – Exaggerating the similarities in an analogy or ignoring key differences.


9.5b

TESTS FOR AN ARGUMENT SUBJECT A good subject: ▲ Concerns a matter of opinion: a conclusion drawn from evidence. ▲ Can be disputed: others might take a different position. ▲ Will be disputed: it is controversial. ▲ Is something you care about and know about or want to research. ▲ Is narrow enough to argue in the space and time available.

A bad subject: ▲ Cannot be disputed because it concerns a fact, such as the distance to Saturn or the functions of the human liver. ▲ Cannot be disputed because it concerns a personal preference or belief, such as a liking for a certain vacation spot or a moral commitment to vegetarianism. ▲ Will not be disputed because few if any disagree over it: the virtues of a secure home, for instance.


10.1

REASONING Inductively Evidence Facts and expert opinions: Statistics and opinions about the cost-effectiveness of advertising in different media.

Assumption What is true in one set of circumstances (one set of print ads) is true in a similar set of circumstances (other print ads).

Claim Generalization: Print is the most cost-effective advertising medium.


10.2

REASONING Deductively Assumption A fact, a principle, a belief, or (as here) a generalization from induction: Print is the most cost effective advertising medium.

Evidence New information: Companies on lean budgets should advertise in the most cost-effective medium.

Claim A conclusion linking assumption and evidence: Companies on lean budgets should advertise in print. Copyright © 1995–2007 by Pearson Education, publishing as Longman Publishers Fowler/Aaron, The Little, Brown Handbook, Tenth Edition

10.3

Organizing an Argument’s Body and Response to Opposing Views The traditional scheme The problem-solution scheme Claim 1 and evidence The problem: claims and evidence Claim 2 and evidence The solution: claims and evidence Claim X and evidence Response to opposing views Response to opposing views Variations on the traditional scheme Use a variation if you believe your readers will reject your argument without an early or intermittent response to opposing views. Response to opposing views Claim 1 and evidence Claim 2 and evidence Claim X and evidence

Claim 1 and evidence Response to opposing views Claim 2 and evidence Response to opposing views Claim X and evidence Response to opposing views


10.4

CHECKLIST FOR REVISING AN ARGUMENT ➤ Thesis  What is your thesis? Where is it stated?  In what ways is your thesis statement an arguable claim?

➤ Reasoning  If your thesis derives from induction, where have you related the evidence to your generalization?  If your thesis derives from deduction, is your syllogism both true and valid?  Have you avoided fallacies in reasoning?

➤ Evidence  Where have you provided the evidence readers need?  Where might your evidence not be accurate, relevant, representative, or adequate?


10.5a

CHECKLIST FOR REVISING AN ARGUMENT (continued) ➤ Appeals  Where have you considered readers’ probable beliefs and values?  How are your rational appeals and emotional appeals appropriate for your readers?  What is your ethical appeal? How can you improve it?

➤ Opposing views  What opposing views have you answered?  How successfully have you refuted opposing views?

➤ Organization  How clearly does your argument move from one point to the next?  How appropriate is your organization given your readers’ likely views?


10.5b

EXERCISE Finding a subject for argument Explain why each subject below is or is not appropriate for argument. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Granting of athletic scholarships Care of automobile tires Censoring the Web sites of hate groups History of the town park Housing for the homeless Billboards in urban residential areas or in rural areas 7. Animal testing for cosmetics research 8. Cats versus dogs as pets 9. Ten steps in recycling wastepaper 10. Benefits of being a parent


7.5a

ANSWERS TO EXERCISE Possible answers Topics that are not appropriate for argument: 2. A matter of facts, and few people would disagree. 4. A matter of facts, and few people would disagree. 8. A matter of personal preference. 9. A matter of facts. 10. A matter of personal belief.


7.5b