Intro to Evaluative Arguments

1. Intro to Evaluative Arguments Stasis Theory: Part II

2. Toulmin Arguments The Toulmin system is a way of schematizing your arguments. It helps you to think through the assumptions underlying your assertions.

3. Enthymemes The heart of the Toulmin argument is the enthymeme. This is a sentence comprised of a claim and a reason. EX: “Superman is a good superhero because he is very strong.” Claim = Superman is a good superhero Reason = because he is very strong.

4. Supporting Components of Toulmin Arguments : Grounds • An enthymeme (claims + reason) is supported by grounds. • Grounds are the evidence behind the generalization in the reason. • In the Superman example, the reason was, “because he is very strong.” The grounds would be, “he was able to pick up automobiles when he was a toddler”

5. Supporting Components of Toulmin Arguments : Warrant • The warrant is the assumption that underlies your enthymeme. In a sense, it is the logical bridge between the claim & the reason • In the Superman example, “Superman is a good superhero because he is very strong,” the assumption (warrant) underlying the argument is that “good superheroes are very strong”.

6. Supporting Components of Toulmin Arguments : Backing • The backing is the explanation or justification of the warrant. This is a good point in your thinking at which to be self-critical: does your warrant in fact make sense? • For example, the backing behind the assumption (warrant) that good superheroes are very strong is that “famous superheroes are very strong – such as Spiderman, the Incredible Hulk, and so on.” • However, a critic could point out that Batman and Inspector Gadget are superheroes, but mainly by virtue of their hardware, not their strength.

7. Toulmin Arguments: Revision • After having examined the backing behind the warrant that subsudizes my argument (enthymeme), it is obvious that I need to re-think my reason. • At this stage, I might say that “Superman is a good superhero because he uses his powers to help people.” Now my grounds, backing & warrant have changed, so I would need to examine them anew.

8. X & Y • Synonymous with the terms “genus” & “species” • X is the individual case; Y is the larger group to which X does (or does not) belong. • This is applicable to both definitional and evaluative arguments

9. X & Y Continued • The Oxford English Dictionary is the most authoritative dictionary in the English language • X = The OED; Y = authoritative English language dictionaries • This pinot noir is an excellent wine • X = this pinot noir; Y= excellent wines

10. Definitional vs Evaluative Arguments • The “X is or is not a Y” format is very similar for both definitional and evaluative arguments • The distinction is that definitional arguments merely claim that X is a Y; evaluative arguments examine whether or not X is a good, efficient, effective, attractive or potent (to name a few possibilities) Y

11. Definitional vs Evaluative Arguments - Criteria • Like definitional arguments, evaluative arguments are focused on defining criteria for the “Y” term, and then evaluating the “X” according to those criteria. • A 3-sentence summary of an evaluative paper: - A good Y meets criteria A, B & C - X meets the criteria A, B & C - Therefore X is a good Y • Unlike definitional arguments, evaluative arguments are often most controversial in their choice of criteria. Expect to defend your selections.

12. Standards for Criteria • Criteria are often established according to what is normal OR according to what is ideal. • Some situations lend themselves to different kinds of criteria – be self-aware about your selection. In formulating a mission statement, you want to be ideal. In suggesting drug treatment methods, it may be imperative to consider what is normal.

13. Mitigating Circumstances & Cost • Be aware that, if you argue for mitigating circumstances in your criteria, you will have a harder sell. (“I shot John Lennon because I hated my father”) • Keep in mind the issue of cost (in time, money, spirit, &c.); the most superlative X is useless if it is too expensive, hard-to-use, time-consuming, &c.

14. Building Your Evaluative Argument – 1) Choose your Y • Determine the most suitable Y category for your X. • Choose the smallest possible Y (within reason). • “Amazon.com is the best website” is less informative that “Amazon.com is the best on-line bookstore.”

15. Building Your Evaluative Argument – 2) Choosing criteria • Select your criteria by considering the function of your Y term. • What is it supposed to do? “Granny Smiths are the best baking apples” – Baking apples should stay firm when cooked and not become cloyingly sweet • “Arabella is the best candidate for this engineering internship” - A good engineering intern should be skilled with computers and capable of following highly detailed directions.

16. Building Your Evaluative Argument – 3 & 4 • 3 – Use the Y term’s purpose to generate criteria • 4 – Sort the criteria by importance • You may want to assemble your criteria in you paper in order of increasing strength of argument & importance.

17. Building Your Evaluative Argument – Outline • Introduce your issues & why evaluating X is problematic or controversial • Summarize opppsing vies • Refute or concede to opposing views • Present your own claim • Criterion 1 • Criterion 2 • Criterion 3… &c • Sum up your evaluation (conclusion)

18. Testing Your Evaluative Argument • Will my audience accept my criteria? • Are my criteria based on the smallest applicable class for X? • Will readers acccept my weighting of the criteria? • Do I need to defend my use of normal/ideal criteria?

19. The End Go to class website