Chapter 22: Analyzing Messages

Sybil Priebe

Throughout this course, you have been introduced to numerous ideas on what argument is, what an argument could contain, and how an argument could be structured. Please note that these are just IDEAS on what people think argument needs to BE and LOOK LIKE. Many arguments that work in life do not follow these definitions, contents, and structures, so please be aware of that.

Definitions 1 

 “Man Assaults Wife With Waffle.” Image by studio tdes. Flickr Creative Commons. https://www.flickr.com/photos/thedailyenglishshow/17337882771

Definitions of Argument

Definition 1.

“Argument” 2 is a word that has multiple distinct meanings, so it is important to be clear from the start about the sense of the word that is relevant to the study of logic. In one sense of the word, an argument is a heated exchange of differing views. Some people would say that if you’re expressing conflicting views in a heated manner, that’s the definition of argument. However, that is not the sense of “argument” with which logic is concerned. Logic concerns a different sense of the word “argument.” An argument, in this sense, is a reason for thinking that a statement, claim or idea is true. 

Definition 2.

When instructors 3 use the word "argument," they're talking about defending a certain point of view through writing or speech. Usually called a "claim" or a "thesis," this point of view is concerned with an issue that doesn't have a clear right or wrong answer (e.g., four and two make six). Also, this argument should not only be concerned with personal opinion (e.g., I really like carrots). Instead, an argument might tackle issues like abortion, capital punishment, stem cell research, or gun control. However, what distinguishes an argument from a descriptive essay or "report" is that the argument must take a stance; if you're merely summarizing "both sides" of an issue or pointing out the "pros and cons," you're not really writing an argument. "Stricter gun control laws will likely result in a decrease in gun-related violence" is an argument. Note that people can and will disagree with this argument, which is precisely why so many instructors find this type of assignment so useful – these assignments make you think!

Definition 3.

An argument is any statement that has a counter stance to it. Example: “I like peanut butter” does not have a counter stance. No one can argue that my likes or dislikes are factually wrong. But an example like “there is no god” has at least one counter stance which would be “there IS a god,” right? 

Question for Reflection:

Which definition do you understand the most? Why?

Why Argue? 3 

We don’t always argue to win. Yes, you read that correctly. Argumentation isn’t always about being “right.” We argue to express opinions and explore new ideas. When writing an argument, your goal is to convince an audience that your opinions and ideas are worth consideration and discussion. 

Academic arguments usually "articulate an opinion." This opinion is always carefully defended with good reasoning and supported by plenty of research. Research? Yes, research! Indeed, part of learning to write effective arguments is finding reliable sources (or other documents) that lend credibility to your position. It's not enough to say "capital punishment is wrong because that's the way I feel."

Instead, you need to adequately support your claim by finding:

● facts

● statistics

● quotations from recognized authorities, and

● other types of evidence

You won't always win, and that's fine. The goal of an argument is simply to:

● make a claim

● support your claim with the most credible reasoning and evidence you can muster

● hope that the reader will at least understand your position

● hope that your claim is taken seriously

Where Do We Find Arguments?

Billboards, television advertisements, documentaries, political campaign messages, and even bumper stickers are often arguments – these are messages trying to convince an audience to do something. 

Photo by Nathan Dumlao on Unsplash: published January 3, 2021.

Photo by Jennifer Griffin on Unsplash: published July 26, 2020.

Content

A lot of teachers and writing “experts” will tell you that the content of an argument should ONLY include ethos, pathos, and logos. But what if you just used pathos to get your point across, like Donald Trump? That guy is all passion without much logic or expertise, right? I know that’s an argumentative statement in itself, but really, he’s an example of someone who focuses on pathos. And it works.

The idea here is that argument doesn’t HAVE to include certain elements to be perfect or valid or to even WORK on one’s audience! This chapter covers the basics like ethos, pathos, and logos, and then throws what we SHOULDN’T do out there too… they’re called logical fallacies… however, some might argue (gasp!) that sometimes a logical fallacy can work!

Think of your audience. Think of your purpose. Think of your topic. Think of your message. How can you get across everything you want to say clearly and in a way that convinces them to rethink what their opinion is?

Ethos, Pathos, and Logos 4 

Within the content of your argument, you may want to utilize ethos, pathos, and logos. You will also want to shy away from using logical fallacies. 

Rhetoric 5 

Rhetoric is a discipline built on the notion that language matters. There are several common characteristics of rhetoric that we value.

Rhetoric fits into three distinct categories: Ethos is the Credibility behind the persuasion; it makes an ethical appeal to readers. Pathos is the Emotion behind the persuasion; therefore, it makes an emotional appeal. Logos is the Logic in the persuasion; therefore, it makes a logical appeal to readers.

Example “Cheat Sheet.”

Ethos = Expert

Pathos = Passion

Logos = Logic

Here are the in-depth explanations: 

Ethos 

Ethos is a means of convincing an audience of the reliable character or credibility of the speaker/writer, or the credibility of the argument. It is an important tool of persuasion because if you can get your audience to see you (or your argument) as credible and trustworthy, it will be much easier to persuade them.

Ethos encompasses a large number of different things which can include what a person wears, says, the words they use, their tone of voice, their credentials, their experience, their charge over the audience, verbal and nonverbal behavior, criminal records, etc. At times, it can be as important to know who the person presenting the material is, as what they are saying about a topic.

Many companies, especially those big enough to afford famous spokespersons, will use celebrities in their ad campaigns in attempts to sell their products. Often times ads for medical products or even chewing gums might say that four out of five doctors/dentists recommend a certain product. Some commercials may even show a doctor in a white lab coat approving whatever is for sale. Now, provided that the person you are viewing is an actual doctor, this might be an example of a good ethos argument. On the other hand, if an automotive company uses a famous sports figure to endorse a product, we might wonder what that person knows about this product. The campaign and celebrity are not being used to inform the consumer, but rather catch their attention with what is actually a faulty example of ethos.

● EXAMPLE: I'm an expert on the death penalty, I have a PhD. in economics from Stanford, and after studying the topic for many years we have found that by abolishing the death penalty we could save 14 million a year due to fewer legal costs.

Pathos 

Pathos can best be described as the use of emotional appeal to sway another's opinion in a rhetorical argument. Emotion itself should require no definition, but it should be noted that effective pathetic appeal (the use of pathos) is often used in ways that cause anger or sorrow in the minds and hearts of the audience.

Pathos is often the rhetorical vehicle of public service announcements. A number of anti-smoking and second-hand smoking related commercials use pathos heavily. These commercials use powerful words (like "love") and images to get at the emotions of the viewer, encouraging them to quit smoking. The goal is for the audience to become so "enlightened" and emotionally moved that the smoking viewers never touch another cigarette.

● EXAMPLE: We should have the death penalty because of the evil acts people have committed, or my husband was brutally killed and wouldn't you want justice for someone if they murdered your spouse?

Logos

It is used to persuade an audience by logical thought, fact and rationality. Logos can be a useful tool of persuasion because if you can ‘prove’ an argument through logical and sound reasoning, your audience is more likely to be persuaded.

● EXAMPLE: We should abolish the death penalty because it will save money and lives.

BONUS FEATURE: Logos Isn’t Logic?

Logos. 6 Ethos. Pathos. The three basic rhetorical appeals. Surely Aristotle 7 laid them down for all writers over 2,300 years ago, right? In his text, On Rhetoric, Aristotle presents logos as argument itself, aligned with ethos, the appeal of a speaker’s character, and pathos, the appeal to audience attitude or feeling. Together, these appeals infuse an argument with its persuasive power. However, an often simplistic, formulaic, and transactional use of these complex terms detaches them from their potential meaning. Such is the persistent problem, or bad idea, about logos.

Logos, the “argument itself” according to Aristotle, consists of material such as data and narrative, as well as the cogent reasoning that allows us to make sense of our stories. However, through careless practice, mistranslation, or misconception of the word’s origins, logos is often defined simply as logic. Logic, in Aristotle’s terms, is a tool for scientific calculation and investigation. Aristotle is considered the father of logic because he invented a structure called the syllogism, exemplified by the famous statement: “Socrates is a man. All men are mortal. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.” The first two assertions—“Socrates is a man. All men are mortal”—are premises that lead “of necessity,” in Aristotle’s terms, to the only conclusion: “Socrates (a man) is therefore mortal.”

All sources that dispute the logic-only definition speak of logos as complex, a bit mysterious, and resistant to easy analysis. It’s true that Aristotle defined logos as “the argument … (and) proof, or apparent proof, provided by the words of the speech itself.” However, textual evidence of logos existed centuries before the systematizing hand of Aristotle traced the strands of rhetorical proofs through logos, ethos, and pathos in 350 BCE. Ancient texts reveal competing perspectives of logos, from spiritual to structural. The Online Writing Lab (OWL) of Purdue University gathers these disparate views in one succinct statement that poses and resolves the problem of this potent word: “Logos is frequently translated as some variation of ‘logic or reasoning,’ but it originally referred to the actual content of a speech and how it was organized.”

EXERCISE 1 

Is the meme below correct? Why or why not? Give evidence for your answer. 

EXERCISE 2 

In each of the situations below, create a persuasive/argumentative statement using Ethos, Pathos, and/or Logos. 

Situation 1: You are trying to persuade an elderly person to join Facebook. 

Situation 2: The president of the college canceled an LGBTQ+ rally because she has security concerns. Persuade her to reconsider. 

Situation 3: A teacher is requiring students to read something published by the Ku Klux Klan. Persuade that teacher to ditch the reading. 

Situation 4: Your mother is on another diet, but you want her to try your freshly baked rhubarb raisin pie. 

Situation 5: You are trying to persuade your partner to allow you to foster two dogs who were abandoned.

Situation 6: A classmate of yours wants to write their research paper on abortion; you think it’s too controversial of a topic – convince them to write about something else.

Situation 7: A close friend of yours wants to drop out of college; persuade them to reconsider.

EXERCISE 3 

Take one topic and write an ethos, pathos, and logos persuasive statement for each. 

Let’s try the example topic of abortion. An ethos statement might sound like this: A popular gynecologist asks in her interview about what we would do in cases of miscarriage, or when women naturally flush a fertilized egg out of their systems; a pathos statement might sound like: Do you want to go through what a woman might have to endure if in her third trimester she discovers the fetus will be born without functioning lungs? Lastly, a logos statement might go like this: If life ends with the brain stopping, shouldn’t life begin with a fully-formed brain? 

Example topics to play with: climate change, COVID-19, corporate welfare, racism, weight bias…

Other Ways To Argue…

Deductive Logic 4 

A deductive logical argument is one that works from the top to the bottom. It begins with what is known as a "major premise," adds a "minor premise," and attempts to reach a conclusion. A major premise is a statement that names something about a large group, a minor premise takes a single member, and the conclusion attempts to prove that because this single member is a part of the larger group, they must also have the trait named in the original statement. 

For Example: 8 MEN ARE TALL - a major premise as it works with a large group of people BOB IS A MAN - a minor premise as we hear about only one individual of that group BOB IS TALL - we attempt to make a conclusion based upon what we have already been told 

Now, if it is true that men are tall, and that Bob is a man, then we can safely infer that Bob must be tall. However, beware the logical fallacy! Though it may be true that in certain cultures men are, on average, taller than women, certainly this is not always the case. Being that our major premise is not altogether true, we can now say that this argument is flawed. 

Furthermore, we might ask what our definition of "tall" is. Tall is different if we are talking about the average population, or basketball players. Also, what is a man? Do individuals who are transgender count? We see that the problem becomes far more complex the more we look into it.

Inductive Logical Argument 9 

As some would argue that a deductive argument works from the top down, toward a conclusion, some comment that an inductive argument works from the bottom up. This is mildly misleading. What is meant by this is that an inductive logical argument begins with a firm affirmation of truth, a conclusive statement. By getting the audience to agree with this statement, the argument moves to the next "logical" step. It proceeds in this manner until the argument has led you from one seemingly reasonable conclusion to another that you may not have originally agreed with. Take the following as an example. Move through the argument slowly, making sure you understand and agree with each step in the process (and please forgive the religious content, you'll come to see it is irrelevant anyway).

Example 10 

The human soul is inherently free. This is its very nature. We are confined to our mortal, earthly bodies, but our souls must be kept free, or the nature of the soul is entirely negated. If one chooses to believe in a soul, they can only believe that it embraces this (vague idea of ) freedom.

At conception, a child is given a soul. Some may argue that it is not until birth, but if those very same persons are pro-life, they confuse their arguments. Thus, if someone is pro life, and believes in a soul, they must believe in the freedom of that soul, and also accept that the soul is granted upon conception.

A soul cannot die. By the same means by which it is free over the body, a soul claims immortality while the body decomposes and is ruined. To deny that a soul is immortal is again to deny the very essence of a soul. Thus, if someone is pro-life, and believes in a soul, they must believe in the freedom of that soul, the immortality of the soul, and also accept that the soul is granted upon conception.

A soul cannot be born. It is immortal and cannot die, it is not earthly, it forever exists, and cannot be born. There are tales in Greek mythology of Athena’s birth, yet she bounds from her father’s head a fully decorated woman. She was not born. She existed previously, as Milton writes the Son in Paradise Lost. If one accepts the Bible’s teachings, there can be no reincarnation, another form of birth, a rebirth. Thus, if someone is pro-life, and believes in a soul, and does not accept reincarnation, they must believe in the freedom of that soul, the immortality of the soul that is always and forever (which cannot be born and cannot die), and also accept that the soul is granted upon conception.

A soul being always an essence, and not being able to be reincarnated, can only exist outside of the body, somewhere, until the act of conception occurs. That soul must then be placed in the body that was forever intended to receive it, as it belongs nowhere else. The soul is fated to that one body. Thus, if someone is pro-life, and believes in a soul, and does not accept reincarnation, namely a practicing Catholic, they must also believe in the freedom of the soul, and in the concept of fate. Fate, however, completely opposes the idea of freedom. 

One cannot then believe in a soul, for it immediately enforces a belief if fate which directly negates the belief in the soul. If our actions are written in a Divine plan, we are not free to make our own choices. Every action has been scripted. Do not worry, it must be that you were meant to read this.

Having seen this, some might say that the argument defeats Catholicism from an atheist standpoint. Others might find that it argues for the secularization of religion. Still, there are ways in which it supports Catholicism at the same time. Though the argument might seem as if it is disagreeing with the Catholic religion, and some would agree that it is, we must always be looking for the logical fallacy. Upon closer inspection, you may notice that all this argument truly does, in one reading of the text, is to explain the complexity of God through the mind of a human. Catholicism has argued since the beginning that God is impossible to fully explain using the conceptions of man. In that way, this argument only supports that conclusion. Be aware that there will be logic fallacies hidden in almost every argument. If there is more than one side to an argument, such as in religious or political debates, it is most likely because the argument is impossible to prove. Hence, there will be a logical fallacy present.

Random Sampling 2 

Random sampling is a common sampling method that attempts to avoid any kinds of sampling bias by making selection of individuals for the sample a matter of random chance (i.e., anyone in the population is as likely as anyone else to be chosen for the sample). The basic justification behind the method of random sampling is that if the sample is truly random (i.e., anyone in the population is as likely as anyone else to be chosen for the sample), then the sample will be representative. The trick for any random sampling technique is to find a way of selecting individuals for the sample that doesn’t create any kind of bias. A common method used to select individuals for a random sample (for example, by Gallup polls) is to call people on either their landline or cell phones. Since most voting Americans have either a landline or a cell phone, this is a good way of ensuring that every American has an equal chance of being included in the sample. Next, a random number generating computer program selects numbers to dial. In this way, organizations like Gallup are able to get something close to a random sample and are able to represent the whole U.S. population with a sample size as small as 1000 (with a margin of error of +/- 4). As technology and social factors change, random sampling techniques have to be updated. For example, although Gallup used to call only landlines, eventually this method became biased because many people no longer owned landlines, but only cell phones. If some new kind of technology replaces cell phones and landlines, then Gallup will have to adjust the way it obtains a sample in order to reflect the changing social reality.

Logical Fallacies 11 

If ethos, pathos, and logos are helpful ways to argue, logical fallacies are supposedly the opposite. Usually. Although, really, they are oddly quite powerful in helping someone WIN an argument… there is a reason there are so many of them; we can get tripped up when hearing an argument or when stating one, and it happens to everyone!

Wait, Should Students Learn Fallacies At All? 12 

One measure of effective writing, when taught alongside argument and critical thinking, is the extent to which a writer identifies and roots out logical fallacies, both in others’ arguments and in one’s own. Variously defined as errors or flaws of reasoning, logical fallacies are generally thought to be violations in an argument that keep the truth of the matter, whatever it may be, somehow beyond the grasp of the writer and reader. In fact, such a view is so ingrained in our popular consciousness that it’s not uncommon for discussions of fallacies to slip into a hyperbolic, even religious tenor, as in the case of one highly trafficked blog on fallacies that commands across the top of its homepage, “Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies!” Such commandments rest on an assumption that by stamping out fallacies a writer’s ideas can stand firmly on the foundations of logic, thus free of obfuscation and open to unadulterated analysis. However, as with most rules associated with writing, the proscription of logical fallacies is more complicated than commonly thought.

Logical fallacies earn the bad idea label because their application to writing and argument often serves as much to obstruct communication as not. I’ll admit this is an ironic claim, since fallacies are preserved in most writing guides because their identification and eradication are presumed to put arguments on firmer ground—but hear me out. Logical fallacies should be put out to pasture for three reasons: (1) defining logical fallacies is notoriously difficult and leads to selective attribution and enforcement; (2) identifying logical fallacies can actually work to shut down communication rather than energize it; and (3) attempting to adhere to proper logical form can stifle creativity and undermine one’s ability to wrestle with uncertainty.

Well, Here They Are, Just In Case?  

A fallacy 2 is simply a mistake in reasoning. A fallacy is an argument whose form is invalid. 

Post Hoc 

Latin for "after this, therefore because of this." Arguing that because one thing follows another, the first caused the second. But sequence is not cause. It assumes sequence of events for a causal relationship, holding that the chain of events is closely linked to one another where the first event caused the second and so on. 

Example: "Construction workers are dumb."

Bandwagon Appeal

This stems from the wrong reasoning that everyone is doing it, so why shouldn't you? But in reality, everyone is not actually involved in the act and it holds wrong reasons to do it. 

Example: It doesn't matter if I do not cite the sources of my reference; no one else cares to do it.

Either – Or / False Dichotomy 

It suggests that there are only two choices in binary opposition for a given complex situation. This is rarely the case in an actual situation. 

Example: "Either we eliminate the regulation of business or else profits will suffer." (It ignores hosts of other possibilities for incurring losses.)

Ad Hominem 

Literally means "to the person." This form of faulty reasoning aims toward personal attacks against an individual as opposed to rational reasoning. In an argument, this is an attack on the person rather than on the opponent's ideas.

Example: “My opponent is against the supporting the bill; I think he probably has some vested interest for not supporting it.” 

Ad Populum

Literally means "to the people." It is based on using readers' prejudices and biases instead of sound reasoning. 

Example: “We cannot allow to open Indian restaurants in this suburb which is predominantly white based. Indian cuisine is very hot and spicy, and therefore, unhealthy for our diet.”

False Analogies / False Equivalencies

Analogies always compare two or more situations that reflect some degree of resemblance. In this case two situations are wrongly made to resemble each other leading to false analogies. 

Example: "Japan quit fighting in 1945 when we dropped nuclear bombs on them. We should use nuclear bombs against other countries." 

Begging The Question

It occurs when the claim is passed off as evidence by assuming as stated in fact what is supposed to be proved. 

Example: "People should be able to say anything they want to because free speech is an individual right."

Strawman 

Setting up the counterarguments as weak so that they can be easily rejected. Misrepresenting and exaggerating one part of the opponent’s argument to dismiss it and the entire argument. Changing or exaggerating an opponent's position or argument to make it easier to refute.

Example: "Environmentalist won't be satisfied until not a single human being is allowed to enter a national park." 

Red Herring 

It is a tactic that introduces a false or irrelevant claim to distract the readers from the main argument. 

Example: Personal income taxes should be reduced because there are too many essential bills that need to be paid.

Slippery Slope

It follows that certain chain of events will happen anyways and will lead to another. 

Example: "If we grant citizenship to illegal immigrants, no one will bother to enter the country legally."

Polarization

It resorts to exaggerations of positions or groups by situating their claims as extreme or irrational. 

Example: "Feminists are man-haters."

Here Are More Potential Flaws In Argument 13…

Appeal To Tradition

"We've always done it this way." Arguing that because something has always been done in one way in the past, it should continue to be done that way.

Appeal To History

"If something has happened before, it will happen again." Arguing that what has happened in the past is always a guide to the future and/or the past will repeat itself.

Appeal To Emotion 

"These poor puppies have been abandoned and you could give them the loving home they so desperately need." Arguing through tugging at people’s emotions rather than through logical reasoning/argument.

Appeal To Authority 

Trying to persuade a reader to accept an argument based on the respect for authority rather than logic.

Restricting The Options

“We blindfold him, or we knock him out.... or you just let your fiancée your wedding dress." Presents a limited picture of choices available in a situation in order to support one particular option.

Circular Argument

"People like dogs because dogs are kind pets which people like." Where a reason is the same as the conclusion, so the argument doesn't go anywhere as it just restates the argument rather than actually proving it.

Non Sequitor

Latin for "it does not follow." An inference or a conclusion that does not follow from the premises, evidence or reasoning given prior.

Conflation 

Putting two or more things together that aren't related. Treating two things as the same when in fact they aren't. 

Example: Obesity often conflated with lack of fitness.

Hasty Generalization

Drawing a general conclusion from insufficient evidence/limited examples.

Gambler’s Fallacy 2 

The gambler’s fallacy occurs when one thinks that independent, random events can be influenced by each other. For example, suppose I have a fair coin and I have just flipped 4 heads in a row. Erik, on the other hand, has a fair coin that he has flipped 4 times and gotten tails. We are each taking bets that the next coin flipped is heads. Who should you bet flips the head? If you are inclined to say that you should place the bet with Erik since he has been flipping all tails and since the coin is fair, the flips must even out soon, then you have committed the gambler’s fallacy. The fact is, each flip is independent of the next, so the fact that I have just flipped 4 heads in a row does not increase or decrease my chances of flipping a head. Likewise for Erik. It is true that as long as the coin is fair, then over a large number of flips we should expect that the proportion of heads to tails will be about 50/50. But there is no reason to expect that a particular flip will be more likely to be one or the other. Since the coin is fair, each flip has the same probability of being heads and the same probability of being tails—50%.

EXERCISE 4 

Take any of the logical fallacies and write a mini-argument showing that sometimes logical fallacies can work and can create relatively valid arguments. 

EXERCISE 5 

What kinds of problems, if any, do the following statistical generalizations have? If there is a problem with the generalization, specify which of the two conditions (adequate sample size, non-biased sample) are not met. Some generalizations may have multiple problems. If so, specify all the problems you see with the generalization. 2 

1. Bob, from Silverton, CO drives a 4x4 pickup truck, so most people from Silverton, CO drive 4x4 pickup trucks.

2. Jesus counts and categorizes birds that land in the tree in his backyard every day from 5:00-6:00 am, from 11:00-12:00 pm, and from 5:00- 6:00 pm. He counts mostly mourning doves and generalizes, “most birds that land in my tree during the 24-hour day are mourning doves.”

3. Jesus counts and categorizes birds that land in the tree in his backyard every evening from 10:00-11:00 pm. He counts mostly owls and generalizes, “most birds that land in my tree throughout the 24-hour day are owls.”

4. A poll administered to 10,000 registered voters who were homeowners showed that 90% supported a policy to slash Medicaid funding and decrease property taxes. Therefore, 90% of voters support a policy to slash Medicaid funding.

5. A telephone poll administered by a computer randomly generating numbers to call, found that 68% of Americans in the sample of 2000 were in favor of legalizing recreational marijuana use. Thus, almost 70% of Americans favor legalizing recreation marijuana use.

6. A randomized telephone poll in the United States asked respondents whether they supported a) a policy that allows killing innocent children in the womb or b) a policy that saves the lives of innocent children in the womb. The results showed that 69% of respondents choose option “b” over option “a.” The generalization was made that “most Americans favor a policy that disallows abortion.”

7. Dakota’s first rock and roll concert was an Ani DiFranco concert, in which most of the concert-goers were women with feminist political slogans written on their t-shirts. Dakota makes the generalization that “most rock and roll concert-goers are women who are feminists.” He then applies this generalization to the next concert he attends (Tom Petty) and is greatly surprised by what he finds.

8. A high school principal conducts a survey of how satisfied students are with his high school by asking students in detention to fill out a satisfaction survey. Generalizing from that sample, he infers that 79% of students are dissatisfied with their high school experience. He is surprised and saddened by the result.

9. Tallulah once ordered a hamburger from Burger King and got violently ill shortly after she ate it. From now on, she never eats at Burger King because she fears he will get food poisoning.

Structure 

A lot of teachers and writing “experts” will tell you that writing is linear, and that argument should probably be as well, but if writing is subjective, then argument is, too.

There’s a book called Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs by Chuck Klosterman that is sometimes used in courses that cover argument. It’s a book that’s used because it contains sixteen argumentative essays on rather surreal topics, and the arguments are not linear, are not always logical, and sometimes use tangents, swearing, and name dropping to get the point across. 

The lesson here is that if the content (remember that chapter?) may see all sort of variety – sometimes just pathos, sometimes major logic, and sometimes a wild version of a logical fallacy – that the structure of an argument doesn’t have to be PERFECT, either. It might veer off. It might not be linear. And that’s okay.

If you are asked to write an argument 3, there is a basic argument structure. Use this outline to help create an organized argument:

● Introduction: Begin with an attention-getting introduction. Establish the need to explore this topic. Thesis Statement: What’s your claim?

● Brief background on issue (optional).

● Reasons & Evidence: First reason for your position (with supporting evidence)

 ● Second reason for your position (with supporting evidence)

● Additional reasons (optional)

● Counterargument: What’s the other side of the issue? Explain why your view is better than others. (Optional.)

● Conclusion: Summarize the argument. Make clear what you want the audience to think or do.

Introduction

The first paragraph of your argument is used to introduce your topic and the issues surrounding it. This needs to be in clear, easily understandable language. Your readers need to know what you're writing about before they can decide if they believe you or not.

Once you have introduced your general subject, it's time to state your claim. Your claim will serve as the thesis for your essay. Make sure that you use clear and precise language. Your reader needs to understand exactly where you stand on the issue. The clarity of your claim affects your readers' understanding of your views. Also, it's a good idea to highlight what you plan to cover. Highlights allow your reader to know what direction you will be taking with your argument.

You can also mention the points or arguments in support of your claim, which you will be further discussing in the body. This part comes at the end of the thesis and can be named as the guide. The guide is a useful tool for you as well as the readers. It is useful for you, because this way you will be more organized. In addition, your audience will have a clear-cut idea as to what will be discussed in the body.

Body Paragraphs = Background Information

Once your position is stated you should establish your credibility. There are two sides to every argument. This means not everyone will agree with your viewpoint. So, try to form a common ground with the audience. Think about who may be undecided or opposed to your viewpoint. Take the audience's age, education, values, gender, culture, ethnicity, and all other variables into consideration as you introduce your topic. These variables will affect your word choice, and your audience may be more likely to listen to your argument with an open mind if you do.

Developing Your Argument

Back up your thesis with logical and persuasive arguments. During your pre-writing phase, outline the main points you might use to support your claim, and decide which are the strongest and most logical. Eliminate those which are based on emotion rather than fact. Your corroborating evidence should be well-researched, such as statistics, examples, and expert opinions. You can also reference personal experience. It's a good idea to have a mixture. However, you should avoid leaning too heavily on personal experience, as you want to present an argument that appears objective as you are using it to persuade your reader.

Nonlinear Arguments?! WTH?

Before we launch into some helpful graphic organizers, perhaps we need to see what a non linear argument would look like, yes? Well, this example comes from a time period when students in a particular class were asked to write “like Chuck.” 14 

Example: Thirteen and Hotter than the Kardashians 15

Do you remember 7th grade? It was horrible wasn’t it? Probably the most awkward time of your life. Awful. OMG. No. Goodbye. Honestly looking back makes me want to literally throw up. Well apparently teens these days can’t relate to this traumatic experience. And why you ask? Oh it’s because the 7th graders of today’s world look like they are straight out of Teen Vogue 16. Always wearing the latest fashion and looking like they wake up flawless. Well #sorrynotsorry, last time I checked Beyoncé 17 was the only one to wake up flawless. Little girls do not. No, you’re supposed to be chubby with uncontrollable acne.

Back in the day it was cool to rock the heavy make-up that you clearly didn’t know how to put on. Especially that bright blue eye shadow 18. Damn girl, you got it going on! Oh and we can’t forget about those oh so NOT flattering bubble shirts 19. One size fits all . . . my ass. Which makes me think of those infinity scarfs 20 that were so cool back in the day. LOL. Some girls would even rock them as a strapless dress like, ewe. What the hell are you doing?! Middle school was the ultimate shit show if you ask me. Every 90s kid knows that in the moment of this mess, we thought we were hotter than Britney Spears 21 herself. Opps I will not do that again 22. 

Is anyone else still forever pissed about the whole Justin Timberlake and Britney Spears break up?! I don’t think I’ll ever get over it. Power couple for sure. There is even a picture of the two of them sportin’ total jean outfits. Like swear to god she is wearing a jean dress and he is wearing a full out suit and tie….made of some good old Luke Bryan 23 butt huggin’ lovin’ Wranglers. Like how much more of a perfect 90’s couple can you get?! They embarrassed themselves as a team. As a unit. That’s love right there. If you’re a bird I’m a bird right? 24 

Well now that our idols such as Britney Spears and Amanda Bynes 25 has sense jumped off the deep end so has these up and coming not ugly teens. Like why. Why do girls who are honestly only 13 look better than I did in my senior pictures. I’m annoyed. I was proud of those pictures! I went through braces for that shit man. And speaking of braces these girls now a days make braces actually look good! Apparently they come in like a clear option and shit. You can even have them put BEHIND your teeth. Wait what, um no? If you want nice teeth you have to tough it out just like the rest of us losers did. Metal mouth and all. Apparently brace face isn’t an insult anymore? 

Every normal person has to go through that awful period of time where you look back at yourself and cry. That’s how life goes. So get this my sister just turned 14 and you would swear she is a senior in high school. Never has she once picked up the blue eyeshadow. Oh no. Her makeup honestly is perfect everyday like since when did you become this Sephora 26 employee expert on Mac 27 cosmetics? Hell the fact that she even knows how to pluck her eyebrows freaks me out. Umm excuse me I didn’t even know that waxing your eye brows 28 was a thing until like freshman year. I guess unibrows aren’t cool anymore guys. The less bush the better?

The ugly stage can take effect anytime now. She’s almost in high school and has yet to make a fool of herself. I even bet yah I could dig up some of that killer blue eye shadow with a couple bubble shirts to match. Or not. I guess I can just be the chubby ugly sister. She can be the hot sister like Kim 29 and I’ll just be the Chloe. It’s fine. I’ll get over it. 

Graphic Organizers

Now, please note that not all arguments follow a perfect structure. The graphic organizer below is a good start for anyone who needs assistant on putting an argument together. There are oodles of graphic organizers that people can use, and they can be found with a simple Google search; some that may pop up are the OREO organizer or the HAMBURGER organizer. They are all very similar. 

The next two images are persuasion maps (which was turned into an argumentative map, because maybe that makes more sense to some people) that could be used as a “cheat sheets” if necessary.

Infographic created for our first OER textbook, Writing Unleashed.

The great thing about the argumentative structure is its amazingly versatility. Once you become familiar with this basic structure of the argumentative essay, you will be able to clearly argue about almost anything! 

This chapter 2 has provided you the tools to be able to reconstruct arguments like these. As we have seen, there is much to consider in reconstructing a complex argument. As with any skill, a true mastery of it requires lots of practice. In many ways, this is a skill that is more like an art than a science. 

EXERCISE 6 

Compose a mini-argument about anything. Maybe you’ll write 100-350 words about why computer nerds are better than book nerds. 

• Then change that argument’s structure. Here’s where you might take that 100-350 worded essay and translate it into a poem or a tweet or proposal.

BONUS FEATURE: Rogerian Method

The Rogerian argument 30, inspired by the influential psychologist Carl Rogers, aims to find compromise or common ground about an issue. If, as stated in the beginning of the chapter, academic or rhetorical argument is not merely a two-sided debate that seeks a winner and a loser, the Rogerian argument model provides a structured way to move beyond the win-lose mindset. Indeed, the Rogerian model can be employed to deal effectively with controversial arguments that have been reduced to two opposing points of view by forcing the writer to confront opposing ideas and then work towards a common understanding with those who might disagree.

30 

EXERCISE 7 

Find a controversial topic and begin building a Rogerian argument. Write up your responses to the following:

1. The topic or dilemma I will write about is…

2. My opposing audience is…

3. My audience’s view on the topic is…

4. My view on the topic is…

5. Our common ground–shared values or something that we both already agree on about the topic–is…

6. My compromise (the main claim or potential thesis) is…

BONUS FEATURE: Toumlin Method

Stephen Edelston Toulmin (born March 25, 1922) 30 was a British philosopher, author, and educator. Toulmin devoted his works to analyzing moral reasoning. He sought to develop practical ways to evaluate ethical arguments effectively. The Toulmin Model of Argumentation, a diagram containing six interrelated components, was considered Toulmin’s most influential work, particularly in the fields of rhetoric, communication, and computer science. His components continue to provide useful means for analyzing arguments, and the terms involved can be added to those defined in earlier sections of this chapter.

30 The following are the parts of a Toulmin argument:

1. Claim: The claim is a statement that you are asking the other person to accept as true (i.e., a conclusion) and forms the nexus of the Toulmin argument because all the other parts relate back to the claim. The claim can include information and ideas you are asking readers to accept as true or actions you want them to accept and enact. One example of a claim:

My grandfather should wear a hearing aid.

This claim both asks the reader to believe an idea and suggests an action to enact. However, like all claims, it can be challenged. Thus, a Toulmin argument does not end with a claim but also includes grounds and warrant to give support and reasoning to the claim.

2. Grounds: The grounds form the basis of real persuasion and includes the reasoning behind the claim, data, and proof of expertise. Think of grounds as a combination of premises and support. The truth of the claim rests upon the grounds, so those grounds should be tested for strength, credibility, relevance, and reliability. The following are examples of grounds:

Over 70% of all people over 65 years have a hearing difficulty. Hearing aids raise hearing quality.

Information is usually a powerful element of persuasion, although it does affect people differently. Those who are dogmatic, logical, or rational will more likely be persuaded by factual data. Those who argue emotionally and who are highly invested in their own position will challenge it or otherwise try to ignore it. Thus, grounds can also include appeals to emotion, provided they aren’t misused. The best arguments, however, use a variety of support and rhetorical appeals.

3. Warrant: A warrant links data and other grounds to a claim, legitimizing the claim by showing the grounds to be relevant. The warrant may be carefully explained and explicit or unspoken and implicit. The warrant answers the question, “Why does that data mean your claim is true?”

For example, A hearing aid helps most people hear better.

The warrant may be simple, and it may also be a longer argument with additional sub elements including those described below. Warrants may be based on logos, ethos or pathos, or values that are assumed to be shared with the listener. In many arguments, warrants are often implicit and, hence, unstated. This gives space for the other person to question and expose the warrant, perhaps to show it is weak or unfounded.

4. Backing: The backing for an argument gives additional support to the warrant. Backing can be confused with grounds, but the main difference is this: Grounds should directly support the premises of the main argument itself, while backing exists to help the warrants make more sense.

For example, Hearing aids are available locally.

This statement works as backing because it gives credence to the warrant stated above, that a hearing aid will help most people hear better. The fact that hearing aids are readily available makes the warrant even more reasonable.

5. Qualifier: The qualifier indicates how the data justifies the warrant and may limit how universally the claim applies. The necessity of qualifying words comes from the plain fact that most absolute claims are ultimately false (all women want to be mothers, e.g.) because one counterexample sinks them immediately.

Thus, most arguments need some sort of qualifier, words that temper an absolute claim and make it more reasonable. Common qualifiers include “most,” “usually,” “always,” or “sometimes.” 

For example, Hearing aids help most people.

The qualifier “most” here allows for the reasonable understanding that rarely does one thing (a hearing aid) universally benefit all people. Another variant is the reservation, which may give the possibility of the claim being incorrect:

Unless there is evidence to the contrary, hearing aids do no harm to ears.

Qualifiers and reservations can be used to bolster weak arguments, so it is important to recognize them. They are often used by advertisers who are constrained not to lie. Thus, they slip “usually,” “virtually,” “unless,” and so on into their claims to protect against liability. While this may seem like sneaky practice, and it can be for some advertisers, it is important to note that the use of qualifiers and reservations can be a useful and legitimate part of an argument.

6. Rebuttal: Despite the careful construction of the argument, there may still be counterarguments that can be used. These may be rebutted either through a continued dialogue, or by pre-empting the counterargument by giving the rebuttal during the initial presentation of the argument. For example, if you anticipated a counterargument that hearing aids, as a technology, may be fraught with technical difficulties, you would include a rebuttal to deal with that counterargument:

There is a support desk that deals with technical problems.

Any rebuttal is an argument in itself, and thus may include a claim, warrant, backing, and the other parts of the Toulmin structure.

Even if you do not wish to write an essay using strict Toulmin structure, using the Toulmin checklist can make an argument stronger. When first proposed, Toulmin based his layout on legal arguments, intending it to be used analyzing arguments typically found in the courtroom; in fact, Toulmin did not realize that this layout would be applicable to other fields until later. The first three elements–“claim,” “grounds,” and “warrant”–are considered the essential components of practical arguments, while the last three—“qualifier,” “backing,” and “rebuttal”—may not be necessary for all arguments.

EXERCISE 8 

Find an argument in essay form and diagram it using the Toulmin model. The argument can come from an Op-Ed article in a newspaper or a magazine think piece or a scholarly journal. See if you can find all six elements of the Toulmin argument. Use the structure above to diagram your article’s argument. 

BONUS FEATURE: Paragraph Patterns 

This chart meshes content and structure to show you the different ways you might write or argue. Remember 30 that the rhetorical mode a writer chooses depends on their purpose for writing. Some assignments ask students to use a specific mode 31 or method, such as writing a descriptive passage or contrasting two concepts, but most essays incorporate several different modes/methods to express an idea. Overall, these things are sets of tools that allow you different methods to effectively communicate information to your audience. 

32 

Counterargument

In public argumentative writing situations,33 it is important to display an awareness of the fact that there is more than one legitimate way to approach serious social issues. Writers do this by employing “counterargument,” sometimes referred to as “anticipating objections.” This allows writers to acknowledge the complexity of their topic while still maintaining a strong perspective of their own. This strengthens readers’ sense of the writer’s ethos (credibility/reliability) and provides key support for the writer’s thesis.

Doing its job of “anticipating objections,” a counterargument that occurs right after the thesis statement addresses common objections to the writer’s perspective before they are fully formed in the reader’s mind. For topics that need more explanation and context than others, counterargument can be effective placed after that background information. If counterargument occurs late in the paper—especially in the last paragraph or two, it has the effect of saying, “I just made all these great points, but I could be wrong.” Never end an argument with the notion that it might not be valid.

There are three main strategies for addressing counterargument:

● Acknowledgement: This acknowledges the importance of a particular alternative perspective but argues that it is irrelevant to the writer’s thesis/topic. When using this strategy, the writer agrees that the alternative perspective is important, but shows how it is outside of their focus.

● Accommodation: This acknowledges the validity of a potential objection to the writer’s thesis and how on the surface the objection and thesis might seem contradictory. When using this strategy, the writer goes on to argue that, however, the ideal expressed in the objection is actually consistent with the writer’s own goals if one digs deeper into the issue.

● Refutation: This acknowledges that a contrary perspective is reasonable and understandable. It does not attack differing points of view. When using this strategy, the writer responds with strong, research-based evidence showing how that other perspective is incorrect or unfounded. 

Note that all three methods involve acknowledging the existence and reasonableness of contrary perspectives on the writer’s topics. 

EXAMPLES

Let’s see how these three strategies could work in practice by considering the thesis statement “Utah public schools need to invest more money in arts education.” 34 

● Acknowledgement: One possible objection to the thesis could be: “Athletics are also an important part of students’ educational experience.” The writer could acknowledge that athletics are indeed important, but no more important than the arts. A responsible school budget should be able to include both.

● Accommodation: Another possible objection to this thesis could be: “Students need a strong foundation in STEM subjects in order to get into college and get a good career.” The writer could acknowledge that STEM education is indeed crucial to students’ education. They could go on to argue, however, that arts education helps students be stronger in STEM classes through teaching creative problem solving. So, if someone values STEM education, they need to value the arts as well.

● Refutation: The most common objection to education budget proposals is that there is simply not enough money. Given limited resources, schools have to prioritize where money is spent. In terms of research required, refutation takes the most work of these three methods. To argue that schools do have enough resources to support arts education, the writer would need to look at current budget allocations. They could Google “Salt Lake City school district budget” to find a current budget report. In this report, they would find that the total budget for administrative roles in the 2014–15 school year totaled $10,443,596 (Roberts and Kearsley). Then they could argue that through administrative reforms, a small portion of this money could be freed up to make a big difference in funding arts education.

CONCLUSION

Too often, writers employ counterargument in a way that makes them sound contradictory or unsure of themselves. Employing one of these three strategies to address possible objections, however, makes counterargument serve as powerful evidence that helps prove the thesis statement. When used correctly, counterargument strengthens both the writer’s logos (logic) as well as ethos (credibility/reliability). Effective use of counterargument leaves readers with the impression that the writer is a fair-minded, thoughtful participant in public, argumentative writing. 

References

1 Some of this chapter’s contents come from the original chapter on Argument in the first edition of Writing Unleashed.

2 Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking by Matthew J. Van Cleave is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

3 “What is an Argument?” Wikibooks, The Free Textbook Project. Last edited 27 Nov 14. Accessed 10 May 17. https://en.m.wikibooks.org/wiki/Rhetoric_and_Composition/Argument Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.

4 “What is Rhetoric?” Wikibooks, The Free Textbook Project. Edited 27 Nov 14. Accessed 10 May 17. https://en.m.wikibooks.org/wiki/Rhetoric_and_Composition/What_is_Rhetoric. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.

5 Blankenship, Chris, and Justin Jory. “On Rhetoric.” Open English at Salt Lake Community College. 01 Aug 2016. https://openenglishatslcc.pressbooks.com/chapter/on-rhetoric/. Open English @ SLCC by SLCC English Department is licensed under a CC-BY-NC, 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

6 These nuggets are from Nancy Fox’s essay, “Logos is Synonymous with Logic” found in Bad Ideas About Writing.

7 Please note that Aristotle is a problematic character since he created an unfounded race theory that we are now still dealing with centuries later.

8 You might see this similar example used in the Definition part of Chapter 3. There’s a lot of overlap!

9 "Rhetoric and Composition/Rhetorical Analysis." Wikibooks, The Free Textbook Project. 16 Dec 2021, 19:45 UTC. 19 May 2022, 13:48 <https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Rhetoric_and_Composition/Rhetorical_Analysis&oldid=4016987>.

10 A sample inductive argument by Ben Doberstein.

11 “Logical Fallacies.” Wikibooks, The Free Textbook Project. Edited 20 July 09. Accessed 10 May 17. https://en.m.wikibooks.org/wiki/Rhetoric_and_Composition/Logical_Fallacies. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.

12 Bommarito, Daniel V. “Students Should Learn About the Logical Fallacies.” Bad Ideas About Writing. CC BY.

13 “Critical Thinking.” Wikibooks, The Free Textbook Project. Accessed 10 May 17. https://en.m.wikibooks.org/wiki/A-level_Critical_Thinking. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.

14 Chuck Klosterman; his arguments are not linear, are not always logical, and sometimes use tangents, swearing, and name dropping to get the point across.

15 Essay by KCB in 2015.

16 Just your average magazine filled with stick thin starving girls that will not live to be 60.

17 Beyoncé. If you don’t know who that is then I can’t help you. No one can help you. You lose at life. Like honestly the women has her own spellcheck option on Microsoft Word. Figure your life out.

18 CoverGirl never let you down. Every shade imaginable. Or even those big kits you would get at Christmas of all the horrible most unflattering colors that nobody in their right mind would wear. But hey, at the time you thought, hells yes!

19 Yeah about those…worst invention ever. Everyone who was anyone rocked those strong. Especially with a nice black chocker one size fits all necklace to match. Hot.

20 Those super soft yet horribly itchy scarfs that were basically like a giant pool noodle. But with fabric? And you could wear them as a scarf or a shirt if you were dumb enough to do that. They were not cute. But yes. I had one. It was purple.

21 Before she went all psycho. When Brit was in her prime, shoot everyone wanted to be her. She was cool beans back in the day. I’m still secretly a fan.

22 Birney’s hit song Opps I did it again. If you haven’t heard it then you probably should. It’s quite catchy.

23 Apparently this guy has been blessed with ass from Sir Mix A Lot himself. I don’t see it but ask any other girl and they will probably cry about it. Butts are just butts to me I guess.

24 All I’m going to say is the Notebook. Look it up.

25 The Amanda Show was life. Enough said. Bring in the dancing lobsters!

26 That shit isn’t cheap. Since when is a bottle of foundation the same price as week worth of groceries? People be trading food stamps for make-up.

27 Just your average top of the line make-up brand. What ever happened to drugstore make-up that you had to beg your mom to let you get? I remember I had basically give my right leg up just so I could have the colored mascara and not the clear gel crap. Goals people. We had goals and we achieved them. Even though they just ended up kicking us in the ass.

28 The bushier the better back in the day. I didn’t even think twice about eyebrows in middle school. Now if my sister looks at me a little too long I get self-conscious that she knows that I skip out that day and didn’t take the time to pluck the strays.

29 Everyone knows who Kim K is, please. Why would I even footnote this? But yeah everyone knows she is the hottest of the family and she’s the reason that family is famous. I mean it’s the dumbest reason possible but Kim still owns that and everyone else just falls in line behind.

30 Let's Get Writing! by Virginia Western Community College is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

31 Some of these “paragraph patterns” are detailed in Chapter 3.

32 Chart from Let's Get Writing! by Kathy Boylan is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

33 Beatty, Jim. “Counterargument.” Open English at Salt Lake Community College. 01 Aug 2016. https://openenglishatslcc.pressbooks.com/chapter/counterargument/ Open English @ SLCC by SLCC English Department is licensed under a CC-BY-NC, except where otherwise noted.

34 Roberts, Janet M. and Alan T. Kearsley. “Annual Budget Fiscal Year 2014-2015.” Salt Lake City School District. 03 Dec 2017.