Effective Argumentation: Balancing Truth and Persuasion

1. Class 2 • Questions, comments • (http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~harrold/4001/cs4001c_fall2007 • Discussion of Assignment 1 • Assign • Assignment 3 (start in class on 8/30; due in class on 9/4) • Readings • Gift of Fire: Ch 10 (8/30) Mary Jean Harrold

2. Argument Mary Jean Harrold

3. Argument • Not a “fight” or a “debate” • The connotation that an argument is a heated disagreement does not apply here • We are not concerned with formal pro-con debates where one position or another is argued. • An argument can be explicit or implicit • Explicit—direct argument with claims and supporting reasoning and evidence. • Implicit—visual image, cartoon, narrative, poem, etc. Mary Jean Harrold

4. Explicit Argument • An argument makes claims that require justification • often in form of a dialogue involving claims and counterclaims • Explicit or implicit, argument has some necessary components • set of two or more conflicting assertions • attempt to resolve the conflict through and appeal to reason (usually backed by evidence). Mary Jean Harrold

5. Explicit Argument (cont’d) • Argument is both a product and a process • Process—argumentation is a process, often involving a conversation or dialogue. • Product—the product of an argument is a summing up of the contributions or the conclusion Mary Jean Harrold

6. Explicit Argument (cont’d) • Argument is a balance between truth seeking and persuasion • Truth-seeking—the best solution; an optimal solution • Persuasion—what reasons and evidence that best speak to audience’s values and views Mary Jean Harrold

7. The Problem of Truth(Truth versus Persuasion) • What’s the balance? (Too much tilt towards persuasion makes argument propaganda) • May have to sacrifice winning a debate in terms of higher goals, Truth and Goodness • Socrates versus the Sophists (Athens, 5th century B.C.) • Socrates—the goal of debate is to rid the world of error • Sophists—Mercenary debaters who relied on any persuasive technique to win. There are no basic assumptions, no fundamental principles, no truths Mary Jean Harrold

8. The Problem of Truth(Truth versus Persuasion) (cont’d) • But is it better to sometimes win a debate, even if have to lean more towards persuasion than truth-seeking? • And what is truth anyway? Could arguers begin from different basic principles and thus different versions of truth? What is “good” or the “best solution”? That can depend on your starting premises. Mary Jean Harrold

9. Reading Sympathetically and Critically • To read arguments effectively, adopt a multi-step approach • Read as a believer • Read as a doubter • Consider alternative views, and analyze sources of disagreement • Use disagreement productively to prompt further investigation “The idea that we should be open to all ideas is very different from the supposition that all ideas are equally valid” --Lawrence Summers, President, Harvard University Mary Jean Harrold

10. Reading as a Believer • Practice “empathic listening” (see the world through the author’s eyes) • Requires putting aside your own viewpoint for the moment • For this AND the other steps in reading arguments effectively, you must: • read argument carefully for general meaning. • analyze each paragraph for says and does • A does statement identifies a paragraph’s function • A says statement summarizes the paragraph’s content Mary Jean Harrold

11. Reading as a Doubter • Whether you tend to agree with the argument or not, you should now read it critically or skeptically • Demand more proof, doubt evidence given, challenge the author’s assumptions and values. • What is the background of the author or his or her sources? What bias is being brought forward? • What are the source of the claims made? • Are alternatives ignored? Mary Jean Harrold

12. Considering Alternative Views and Analyzing Sources of Disagreement • Since an argument involves two or more conflicting assertions, you must be sure to consider the important disagreements. • Disagreements may be: • -about facts or reality. “Facts” are often not the empirical facts of science, but are often contested. • -about values, beliefs, or assumptions. For example, sometimes these disagreements may manifest themselves as disagreements about definitions (e.g., what is pornography or what is a minority). Mary Jean Harrold

13. Using Disagreement Productively to Prompt Further Investigation • Disagreement is both a strategy for reading arguments and a bridge towards constructing your own arguments • Seek out sources of facts and more complete versions of alternative (and the current) views. • Determine what values are at stake in the issue and articulate your own values. • Consider ways to synthesize alternative views. Mary Jean Harrold

14. Successful Argumentation:The Well-Functioning Committee • Committee: A small group seeking the solution to a problem • Committees sometimes get a bad name, but good committees have done some very important work in social, political, and cultural settings • Exercise: University Standards Committee (p. 17 in WA book) Mary Jean Harrold

15. In-Class Group Organization • Groups will be 4-5 members, and will be different for each discussion • Each group will consist of a • Leader: does not participate in the discussion but facilitates it by ensuring that (1) each member of the group has an opportunity to contribute to the discussion, and (2) the assignment is completed. • Recorder: participates in the discussion, and also records the discussion and prepares required documents/slides/etc. and reports to class, if appropriate • 2-3 Members: participate in discussion, etc. • During the semester, each class member will serve as a group Leader and a group Recorder, so volunteer as groups are formed. • At the beginning of the discussion session, identify the Leader and Recorder Mary Jean Harrold