ARGUMENTATION UNIT

1. ARGUMENTATION UNIT The reasoning behind the language!

2. Day 1: Boardwork! • When you come into class, you will find a statement or statements on the board. • In a notebook on the first page write the following heading at the top: “Fallacies of Pseudoarguments.” • Pseudoarguments are arguments with lines of reasoning based on faulty reasoning or deception. • Write the following examples in your notebook, and write a prediction about what you believe to be the logical fallacy.

3. What is the fallacy? • Ernie Eves is either incompetent and doesn’t know his own platform, or he is purposely misleading Ontario voters. • Dalton McGuinty. He’s an evil reptilian kitten-eater from another planet.

4. Ad Hominem- To the man (personal attacks) • Why do people use ad hominem attacks? • - Lower credibility of the source. • - To take focus off of real issue • - Don’t have another response.

5. Ad Hominem- To the man (personal attacks) • How to beat ad hominem attacks? • - Create a clear focus on issue, logical reasoning, and supporting material. • - If needed, then do a short appeal to the judge to focus on the issues.

6. Pseudoargument #2 • Student A: “Don’t take Mrs. Ankiel’s class, she grades way too hard.” • Student B: “How do you know?” • Student A: “I received a bad grade on my report card last year.”

7. Hasty Generalization- an inference drawn without sufficient evidence. • Tricks to catching a hasty generalization: • - When people say ALL or imply something happens with an entire population. • - People are making claims based on a limited number of examples. • You must have sufficient evidence: Generally one needs statistics created and interpreted correctly.

8. Hasty Generalization- an inference drawn without sufficient evidence. • Defeating hasty generalizations: • - Offer numerous examples of exceptions to the hasty generalization. • - Offer a statistic supporting your examples as the norm, if possible.

9. Pseudoargument #3 • SAT scores and ACT scores have high success predicting college success (i.e. graduation). • Person’s Response: “But I know someone who had a low ACT score and still graduated from college!”

10. The “Person Who” fallacy: Saying a verifiable and statistically accurate trend is not true based on a few examples. • Note: Many of these arguments are based on people claiming your argument is a hasty generalization. • Defeating the “person who” fallacy: • - Emphasize the trend. • - Show examples of the trend being true.

11. What is an Argument? • A fight between two people? • A fight between three people? • A reasoned position somebody presents as true.

12. Four parts of an argument: • Claims- statements or assertions to be proven. • A claim should be controversial and take a stand. • A claim should always answer the question, “What is your point?” • Claims themselves are statements and NOT questions.

13. Example Claims • The Electoral College should be abolished. • The legal age for drinking should be lowered. • Vegetarianism is the best diet choice. • NASA should launch a human expedition to Mars. • Don’t eat that mushroom! • We’d better stop for gas.

14. After Claims Come: 2. Warrants- the principles behind the claim. (a.k.a. reasons why the claim is true)

15. + WRITE YOUR OWN WARRANT FOR EACH OF THE EXAMPLE CLAIMS!

16. The Electoral College should be abolished. • The Electoral College gives undue influence to some states. • The legal age for drinking should be lowered. • I’ve been drinking since I was 14 without problems! • Vegetarianism is the best diet choice. • It is the only diet not harming animals. • NASA should launch a human expedition to Mars. • Because doing so will unify America! • Don’t eat that mushroom! • It’s poisonous!! Ouch! • We’d better stop for gas. • The gauge has been reading empty for 30 miles!

17. Assumptions 3. Assumptions- the logical and persuasive connections between the claim and the warrant. • Answers the questions, “How exactly do you get from the claim to the warrant?” and • “What must be true for the claim and warrant to be true?”

18. Ex. 1:(Warrant) The Electoral College gives small states undue influence, therefore, (Claim) the Electoral College should be abolished. • Assumptions: • No state should have undue influence in Presidential elections. • Abolishing the Electoral College will give all states equal influence.

19. Ex. 2: (Warrant) I’ve been drinking since age 14 without any problems, so (Claim) the legal drinking age should be lowered. • Assumption: • What works for me works for everyone else!

20. Ex. 3:(Claim) Vegetarianism is the best choice of diet because (Warrant) vegetarianism is the only diet not harming animals. • Assumptions: • The most important reason for choosing a diet is whether or not a diet harms animals or not. • All other diets harm animals.

21. Ex. 4:(Claim) NASA should launch a human expedition to Mars because (Warrant) Americans need a unifying goal. • Assumptions: • Americans don’t have something to unify behind. • Americans will unify behind an expedition to Mars.

22. Ex. 5: (Claim) Don’t eat that mushroom; (Warrant) the mushroom is poisonous. • Assumption: • Eating poisonous things is dangerous.

23. Ex. 6:(Claim) We’d better stop for gas because (Warrant) the gauge has been reading empty for more than 30 miles. • Assumptions: • The car cannot travel more than 30 miles on a gallon of gas. • We can find gas if we stopped right now.

24. + People MUST believe the assumptions before you can be persuasive. • Ex. (Claim) Grades in high school should be abolished because (Warrant) I don’t like them. • Assumption: • What I don’t like should be abolished. • (Apparently, I’m special?)

25. Warrants and assumptions tell you what arguments you have to make and at what level you have to make them. • If the warrant isn’t controversial, then defend the claim. • If the warrant is controversial, then defend the warrant, modify the warrant, or make a new warrant.

26. EX:(Claim) Flat taxes are fairer than progressive taxes because (Warrant) flat taxes treat all people the same. • Assumption: • All people should be treated the same. • This assumption may be effective because the assumption, and therefore the warrant, address the all-American value of equality! (Hazzah!)

27. BUT! • (a popularity issue?)

28. (Claim) Progressive taxes are fairer than flat taxes because (Warrant) progressive taxes are based on peoples’ ability to pay. • Assumption: • Fairness is based on ability to pay.

29. In our example, our warrant allows this counter-argument stating our tax is unfair to people who can’t afford to pay taxes. • What if you know the audience won’t accept the warrant or an assumption?

30. Modified Example • (Claim) Flat taxes are preferable to progressive taxes because (Warrant) flat taxes simplify the tax code. • Assumptions: • A simple tax code is desirable. • Less fraud is desirable. • Paying taxes is easier. • Fewer rules makes things simple.

31. Ground- the evidence supporting a claim or warrant. • Support the assumptions and warrants before the claim. • No point in defending any claim when the audience doesn’t believe the reason for the claim.

32. Four types of grounds: • Emotional claim • Ethical claim • Logical claim • Factual claim (most used in debate) • Once the warrant and assumptions are defended, then defend the claim.

33. Ground Example • (Claim) NASA should launch a human expedition to Mars because (Warrant) Americans need a unifying goal.  • Assumption: • Americans will unify behind a human expedition to Mars. • First, defend assumptions, if needed.

34. WARRANT GROUNDS: • (Emotion) Americans want to be a part of something bigger than them. • (Ethical) A country as regionally, racially, and culturally divided as the US needs common purpose and values to hold the democratic system together. • (Logical) In the past, enterprises such as Westward expansion, WWII, and the Apollo moon program enabled many Americans to work toward a common goal.

35. Then defend the claim. • CLAIM GROUNDS • (Fact) The American people are politically divided along lines of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, and class. • (Emotion) A common challenge or problem often unites people to accomplish great things. • (Logic) Successfully managing a human expedition to Mars requires cooperation of the entire nation financially, logistically, and scientifically. • (Logic) A human expedition to Mars would be a valuable scientific project for the nation to pursue. (CLAIM!)