Toulmin's Model Of Argument

In Chapter 2 of Thank You for Arguing by Jay Heinrichs, he discuses how to distinguish the difference between an argument and a fight, and to decide what you want out of an argument. The key point of an argument is to win over the audience to your point of view. In order to win an argument, you need to persuade them. You want your opponent to be persuaded using subtle logical tactics not power and intimidation. Using power and intimidation is the characteristics of a fight. This is when one person takes out his aggression on another, which does not persuade them but initiate’s revenge or rejection. During a fight, the key objective is to win by attacking and belittling your opponent, paying no attention to getting them to change their mind.

to properly use data to form a well rounded argument that could be discussed like-minded

A strong written argument is supported by several methods that are used to legitimize the author’s position as well as to discredit any counterargument brought forth. The techniques include introducing a counterargument and weakening it’s position with evidence. Providing legitimate academic research such as statistics as well as anecdotes from scholars on the given subject can reinforce the author’s argument. Another important method used is requiring the reader to critically think about a subject brought forth by challenging their preconceived ideas about a topic. This may also include using hidden assumptions that use implicit statements which have a certain opinion such as “If I follow the rules, good things will happen”, this is common

In this article titled “Analyzing Arguments: Those You Read and Those You Write” goes over multiple strategies and examples to help you analyze the meaning and purpose of a specific argument and how to strengthen your own.

Conflict is simply a disagreement or argument that can occur between two individual, groups of people in an organisation or between an employer and an employee.

After reading the article “For Argument’s Sake” by Deborah Tannen, it was clear that she was trying to prove that people now a day will argue just to argue. She uses her own experiences as examples. For example, she was on a talk show with her antagonist, who stated to her “When you get out there, I’m going to attack you. But don’t take it personally.” Even though her antagonist clearly stated he enjoyed her book, he was still going to argue with her over it, therefore arguing just to argue. Another example she uses is when a woman called that talk show. The woman told a story of her walking to an area that was a non-smoking area, where there she found a man smoking. She figured that instead of demanding him to stop smoking, she simply states

Have you used this style of argumentation before in your studies or career (either verbally or in past writing assignments/projects)? Will you use it in the future? Why or why not? How will you incorporate your instructor's feedback in your Toulmin essay, assigned this week?  What improvements do you hope to make in the Toulmin essay?

The part of an argument have six point according to Toulmin model. The six point are the claim, support, backing, warrant, qualifier and rebuttal. The claim is what the writer is trying to say, basically the thesis statement. The support is the claim or evidence. The backing is like building a connection to the reader’ opinion. The rebuttal create what is wrong about the argument and represent the different point of view. Lastly the qualifier are word used in the argument like always, never, might, all, never change to sometimes and etc.

I go to two different schools, Pierce County Skill Center in the morning and Cascade Christian in the afternoon. Their is a distinct difference in the two, and that is how they handle religion. At the Skill Center I have seen how some of the christian students are treated, christians are often dismissed and unheard, and atheists are put on a pedestal and openly listened to. I know atheists and christians alike that are good people and have good intentions, but their views are treated very differently. People should not be treated differently because of what they

The Toulmin Model’s primary purpose is to learn and analyze how people argue every day. Toulmin created this “theory of argumentation” because he wanted to help people to argue in a better way. I thought the article was very informative and easy to navigate. I found the flow of Toulmin’s argument very similar to the Ladder of Abstraction. Toulmin uses data and facts in order to back up claims and further enhance the meaning of an argument. Much like Toulmin, the Ladder of Abstraction selects data in order to add meaning to the actions that you will eventually develop. Another thing I really liked about the article was how the article explains each of the segments of the article and how they relate to each other. The article addresses warrants

Every successful business have a bad side to it, such is Walmart, one of the top topic these days for cheating hours off their workers, low wages, and using public’s money (subsidies) for their business. There have been many reports against walmart, but we have rarely seen anything about it on the news or on any other popular site, and there have been too little thing done about it. Walmart have to be more in-check with the Union or the government, because walmart have done many things that hurt their employees and the community just for some profit, and get away with it. Some people might not see walmart as a threat of any kind, but walmart is a big trouble for our community, to small businesses, and our country’s economy.

The Toulmin Method is briefly explained as a way for some people and even debaters to effectively argue, justify and rebut their position on a subject. Aspects that compile an effective argument are a claim, qualifications, grounds, a warrant, backing, and rebuttals. A claim the position that is being argued for or the thesis statement. Qualifiers small words which suggest a group, but not all to support a position to provide truth. Grounds are the reasons or evidence supporting the claim statement. A warrant is the provisions for the authors to be arguing the subject itself, which is justified by reasons called, backing. Finally, a rebuttal is an anticipated objection. All of these definitions are the Toulmin Model-Parts which are used to

I don't genuinely feel like arguing gets a situation anywhere because you’re not solving the problem. More than likely, you will make the situation worse than what it was at first. Arguments can cause conflict and hard feelings, and this is why I prefer to avoid confrontation; I’m also not very aggressive. Arguments make me uncomfortable and I tend to not participate as much as would if it was a traditional conversation. I truly like to make connections with the person and come

Perhaps one of the most crucial parts of an argument is the support provided for it. Aforesaid support can be the turning point in whether someone truly believes your argument or rejects it altogether. Two distinct categories of support exist and they are: joint support and branching support. A particular argument could implement one, or both, of these types of support and their differences affect how the argument might be received.

Depicting a contention in my own words I would say it is when two or more individuals have an alternate perspective on the current subject and don't see eye to eye. They have a tendency to retreat and forward between each other contending their perspective. As indicated by the present there are four sections to a contention; claims, confirmation, counterargument, and reply. The case is the guts of the contention; the confirmation is the thing that backings your case. The counterargument is the other people's assessment of the case and confirmation. The reply is discovering flaws in alternate people perspectives and supporting it with your