Reading and Evaluating Arguments

1. Reading and Evaluating Arguments

2. An argument presents logical reasons and evidence to support a viewpoint The critical reader must be able to evaluate arguments. When you evaluate an argument (a set of claims), you determine its value or persuasiveness.

3. Parts of an Argument • CLAIM - the position on the issue • WARRANT - support and evidence that the claim is reasonable and should be accepted • IMPACT – why it matters • *REFUTATION - opposing viewpoints

4. Types of Claims • CLAIM OF FACT - statement that can be proven or verified by observation or research • “Within ten years, destruction of rain forests will cause hundreds of plant and animal species to become extinct.”

5. Types of Claims • CLAIM OF VALUE - states that one thing or idea is better or more desirable than another. • “Requiring community service in high school will produce more community-aware graduates.”

6. Types of Claims • CLAIM OF POLICY - suggests what should or ought to be done to solve a problem. • “To reduce school violence, more gun and metal detectors should be installed in public schools.”

7. Types of Support • REASON - a general statement that supports a claim. • EVIDENCE - consists of facts, statistics, experiences, comparisons, and examples that show why the claim is valid. • EMOTIONAL APPEALS - ideas that are targeted toward needs or values that readers are likely to care about.

8. Inductive and Deductive Arguments • INDUCTIVE - reaches a general conclusion from observed specifics. • “By observing the performance of a large number of athletes, you could conclude that athletes possess physical stamina.”

9. Inductive and Deductive Arguments • DEDUCTIVE - begins with a major premise and moves toward a more specific statement or minor premise. • “Athletes possess physical stamina. Because Anthony is an athlete, he must possess physical stamina.”

10. Strategies for Evaluating Arguments • Evaluate Types of Evidence - Is it sufficient to support the claim? • Personal Experience - may be biased, so do not accept it • Examples - should not be used by themselves

11. Strategies for Evaluating Arguments • Statistics - can be misused, manipulated or misinterpreted. • Comparisons and Analogies - reliability depends on how closely they correspond to the situation. • Relevancy and Sufficiency of Evidence - is there enough of the right kind to support the claim?

12. Strategies for Evaluating Arguments • Recognizing and Refuting Opposing Viewpoints • Question the accuracy, relevancy or sufficiency of the opponent’s evidence. • Does the author address opposing viewpoints clearly and fairly? • Does the author refute the opposing viewpoint with logic and relevant evidence?

13. Strategies for Evaluating Arguments • Unfair Emotional Appeals • Emotionally Charged or Biased Language • False Authority • athletes endorsing underwear • movie stars selling shampoo • Association • a car being named a Cougar to remind you of a sleek animal • a cigarette advertisement featuring a scenic waterfall

14. Strategies for Evaluating Arguments • Unfair Emotional Appeals • Appeal to “Common Folk” • an ad showing a product being used in an average household • a politician suggesting he is like everyone else • Ad Hominem - attack on the person rather than his/her viewpoint • “Join the Crowd” Appeal or Bandwagon

15. What emotional appeal is being used? • Come early so you won’t have to stand in line – because everyone knows you can make a deal with Dave and save. • As a test pilot, Susan Gibbs knows performance. “That’s why I drive a Mustang,” she says. • Olson’s pizzas are lower in fat and calories. Other pizza makers don’t care about your health.

16. Emotional appeals continued… • “We can work magic with your children,” says Eileen of Eileen’s Day Care. “Call upon us, and your children will be happy you did.” • Liberty Bell Airlines flies anywhere in this great land, from sea to shining sea. • As a young man, Candidate Alan Wilson learned what it means to work hard by spending long hours lifting boxes and sweeping floors working in a department store.

17. Errors in Logical Reasoningcommonly called logical fallaciesinvalidate the argument or render argument flawed • Circular Reasoning/Begging the Question • “Female police officers should not be sent to crime scenes because apprehending criminals is a man’s job.” • Hasty Generalization - conclusion derived from insufficient evidence • “Because one apple is sour, all of them in the bowl must be sour.”

18. Errors in Logical Reasoning • Non Sequitur (“It Does Not Follow”) • “Because my doctor is young, I’m sure she’ll be a good doctor.” • False Cause • “Because I opened the umbrella when I tripped on the sidewalk, the umbrella must have caused me to trip.” • Either-Or Fallacy • “Because of the violence, TV must be either allowed or banned.”

19. Step 1: Identify the Author’s AssumptionsStep 2: Identify the Types of SupportStep 3: Determine the Relevance of the SupportStep 4: Determine the Author’s ObjectivityStep 5: Determine the Argument’s CompletenessStep 6: Determine if the Argument Is Valid & Credible Analyzing an Argument Chapter 11: Evaluating an Author's Argument