1 / 15

Art of Qualifying Claims

This article explores the concept of claims and how they are supported by evidence and warrants in the Toulmin Model of argument. It discusses the importance of defining terms, identifying implicit warrants, and analyzing objections. The article also provides a guide to research and reading for building a strong argument.

raymondwhite
Download Presentation

Art of Qualifying Claims

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Art of Qualifying Claims Prasad M. Jayaweera prasad@dsv.su.se

  2. Standard five-paragraph argument

  3. The Toulmin Model Toulmin, Stephen E.Department: AnthropologyE-Mail: toulmin@usc.edu http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/rgass/stephen_toulmin.htm

  4. Claims • Claims are concisely stated assertions – they describe the focus of an argument – and describe the writers stance toward the claim • Claims are generally not self-evident – they need to be supported by evidence (data) – they need to be limited in scope – they need to have a balanced tone (not be emotionally loaded) • The terms in claims need to be carefully defined

  5. Evidence • Evidence is data presented to support the claim. – Evidence is also referred to as grounds for the argument. • Evidence is the data presented by the arguer to support their claims and can include: – personal experience – statistics – photographs and artifacts – authoritative statements, etc.

  6. Warrants • Warrants are the generalizations that link the Evidence to the claim • Warrants are usually an implicit component of an argument • Because warrants are so general, they can usually be used to justify more than one particular inference. – This means that warrants can be very slippery and need to tied down (supported or justified)

  7. Identifying Implicit Warrants Homer-Dixon and Karparin note that a good device for identifying warrants is the “if-then-because” rule – if the evidence, – then the claim – because of the warrant Argument for Paying Taxes • [if the Evidence] now is the time of year to pay taxes • [then the claim] we should all pay our taxes • [because the warrant] every citizen has a moral obligation to pay taxes • [backing of the warrant] the government acts in everyone’s best interest

  8. Graphical Argument Analysis Thomas Homer-Dixon Claim (is thesis of argument) Warrant (explains why the evidence supports the claim) w Evidence (gives the reasons for accepting the claim) Backing (gives support to warrant) Additional Evidence (can support the original evidence forming a sub-argument) "Graphical Argument Analysis: A New Approach to Understanding Arguments, Applied to a Debate about the Window of Vulnerability," with Roger Karapin, International Studies Quarterly, 33 December 1989, pp. 389-410. http://www.library.utoronto.ca/pcs/tad.htm

  9. Objections Claim (all people should pay their taxes) Warrant (every citizen has a moral obligation to) w Backing (the government acts in everyone’s best interest) Evidence (this is the time of year we are required to pay taxes) Attack2 (The government uses money to benefit special interests and commit immoral acts) Additional Evidence (can support the original evidence forming a sub-argument) Attack1 (This is not the time to pay taxes)

  10. Kinds of Objects 1. Considered and Rejected Objects & Alternatives during research 2. Known Objections that audience will bring 3. Possible Alternatives that audience might think of 4. Objections that may occur after reading

  11. Precision & Accuracy 1. Key terms 2. Oversimplified causes & effects 3. Overgeneralized 4. Counterexamples and special cases Evaluation & criticism 1. Analyze the meaning of terms in Claim, evidence. Ambiguity? 2. Evidence really support the claim? 3. Even if, strong enough? 4. Is the warrant both supportasble & applicable to the claim?

  12. Guide to Research & Reading Your Questions 1. What is the point? 2. What is the scope of your claim? 3. What evidence do you have? 4. What links evidence to claim? 5. But what about? 6. But what if? 7. No problems here at all? Your Source’s Answers 1. I claim that… 2. I limit it to… 3. I offer as evidence… 4. I offer this principle… 5. I can rebut that. First… 6. May claim stands as long as… 7. Well. I have to admit that...

  13. Multiple Dimensions of a Problem Logos—technical, specialized, scientific, professional definition of the problem. Ethos—ethical, spiritual definition of the problem.Pathos—emotional, social, interpersonal definition of the problem.Cosmos—states the problem in a larger context, as it relates to the larger system.

  14. This is Not an Article • Just Some Food for Thought on How to Write One • Carsten Sørensen http://is.lse.ac.uk/staff/sorensen/downloads/not/notart.pdf

More Related