Argument: The Basics

What is Argument?

Arguments are claims backed by reasons that are supported by evidence. There are five
highly relevant characteristics of argument:

Argumentation is a social process. Having an argument involves two or more individuals

responding to one another's claim and support for such a claim. Argument is not simply
restating the same claims and reasons, rather it is supporting, modifying or defending
positions accordingly. As a process, arguments unfold based on the contributions of the
dialogue participants.

Argumentation aims to gain adherence from an audience. People argue to gain assent for their
positions. The world is filled with ambiguous situations that argument attempts to render
more certain. Argumentation is a listener and audience-oriented activityeven if the
audience is just one person. Ultimately, one wishes to persuade to audience the act on the
advanced claim, whether it is to encourage action or gain support.

Argument is an art. As an art, argument has techniques and general principles, therefore is a
learned craft. Although there are suggested guidelines and argumentative tools, there is no
science of argument.

Argument involves contested issues. As a mode of influence, argument has persuasion as a

central goal. Argument does not occur where there is consensus.

Argument fills much of our lives. Whether we recognize so or not, argument dominates our
lives. We spend time arguing about what to eat, who to invite, when to do things, and where
to go.

Why Argue?

That people argue seems obvious. People argue for four main reasons:

To clarify thinking as individuals or groups. Oftentimes, individuals and groups do not know
what they believe but are still faced with information that requires interpretation. Argument
can help individuals and groups learn about issues.

To explain or defend actions or beliefs. People have reasons for doing what they do, though
oftentimes the reasons are not made clear. Argument seeks to shed light on those reasons and
make them explicit and open to scrutiny.

To solve problems or make judgments. The world is filled with controversies about how best
to act, all with competing interests and evidence that prescribe a particular direction.
Argument helps facilitate decision-making about what actors should and should not do.

To have fun. Participating in the clash of ideas can be an intellectually stimulating process
that is primarily pleasurable. Argument is not always serious and deliberative; in fact, most
arguments that people have are over relatively unimportant issues.
What's the difference between argument and logic?

Argument is fundamentatlly a communicative exercise, whereas logic is a more philosophical

endeavor that does not champion persuasion as a primary goal. Therefore, argument, unlike
logic, is an audience oriented process. For an actor to be persuaded of a belief or action, they
must find the arguers arguments compelling. This requires audience adaptation and
development of credibility in addition to developing good, reasonable claims and supporting
reasons.

Argument requires audience adaptation. Arguers must keep in mind that not all arguments are
persuasive to all audiences. Additionally, some techniques might be more successful than
others for specific audiences: professionals are more likely to want polished, analytical,
logical presentations, whereas protestors are more likely to want highly charged, emotive
argument that rallies moral indignation for their cause.

Argument requires establishing credibility. Credibility, as classical rhetoricians recognize,

involves intelligence, character, and goodwill. Intelligence means having knowledge of your
subject and arguing in a clear, logical fashion. Character means displaying traits your
audience admireslike honesty, sincerity, integrity, and moral commitment. Goodwill means
treating your audience with respect, putting your case in terms they can understand, and
acknowledging their points of view. Aristotle notes that credibility is often the controlling
factor in persuasion; if the audience does not perceive the speaker as credibile, then the
audience will not be as attentive to the message itself.

How Does Oral Argument Differ From Written Argument?

Memory. Written argument can be referenced again and again. Titles and subtitles give
readers a preview of what is to come, aiding comprehension of their reading. The exact
phrasing of oral argument disappears as soon as it is spoken. Consequently, listeners often
understand oral arguments only in fragments rather in their totality. As a result, very complex
arguments are difficult to develop orally.

Physicality. Oral argument intimately involves the human body. Pitch, rate, gesture, and tone
of voice, are all forms of nonverbal communication that introduce the potential for
misunderstandings. Written argument generally is clearer. Consequently, the friction that is
possible from verbal interaction plays a large role in (mis)understanding.

What are Basic Components of an Argument?

Argument, while based in logic, is ultimately an exercise in language. Thus, argument is not
exclusively the study of deductive or inductive reasoningthese are tasks reserved for
philosophical inquiry. Instead, argument investigates the communicative aspects of
reasoning. Arguments can be divided into four general components: claim, reason, support,
and warrant.

Claims are statements about what is true or good or about what should be done or believed.
Claims are potentially arguable. "A liberal arts education prepares students better than other
forms of education" is a claim, while "I didn't like the book" is not. No one can really dispute
whether I liked the book or not, but one can argue about the benefits of liberal arts. "I thought
the movie was cool" is not an arguable statement, however,"that movie was an actors best"
does present possibilities for argumentation, for people can disagree and offer support for
why such an acting job was the actor's best based on criteria of what constitutes an
outstanding performance.

Reasons are statements that support a given claim, making a claim more than a mere
assertion. Reasons are statements in an argument that pass two tests. First, reasons are
answers to the hypothetical challenge: Why do you say that? or What justifications can
you give me to believe that? If a claim about liberal arts education is challenged, a reasoned
response could be: It teaches students to think independently. Reasons can be linkedmost
often, not explicitlyto claims with the word "because."

Support substantiates the reasons offered and helps compel audiences to accept an advanced
claim. This usually comes in the form of evidence. Evidence comes in different sorts, and
tends to vary from one academic field or argument topic to another. Scientific arguments
about global warming require different kinds of evidence than mealtime arguments about the
latest movie. Evidence offers challenges and support to the reasons given. Evidence comes in
various forms, including specific examples, statistics, data, testimonies and narratives, to
name only a few.

Warrants are the inferences or assumptions that connect the support to the claim. Warrants
often answer the question what do you have to believe in order to believe that the support
justifies the claim or reason being made? If a reason given to justify a liberal education is
the improvement of critical thinking, then the implicit assumption, or warrant, is that critical
thinking is good. Warrants are often just assumed and rarely articulated, which can make
them difficult to detect.

For Example:

Claim: Recent tax cuts should be abandoned.

Reason: because they only benefit the rich.

Support: Statistics show that the majority of the tax cuts are targeted at upper middle class
and upper class families, not poor families and individuals.

Warrant: Tax cuts that only benefit the rich are unfair.

Or,

Claim: The Civil War was caused by slavery.

Reason: because the Northern states rejected the Southern states reliance on slavery.

Support: The recorded debates in newspapers and state legislatures in the North focused on
the Souths reliance on slavery, not economics.

Warrant: The record of debates in newspapers and legislatures is an accurate guide to

determining the cause of conflict.
Most argumentative controversies, as can be seen in the examples, center on the truth or
validity of the support and warrants. Thus, the interpretation of data and inferences provides
the richest source for students of argument to learn.

1 Introduction to Reasoning

1.1 What is reasoning?

If we see dark clouds in the sky, we infer that it is likely to rain. If we hear the sound of laughter

behind a closed door, we infer that behind that door there is either a person or a device like a

tape recorder or TV set. The experience of seeing the dark clouds and of hearing the sound of

laughter is an instance of the grounds that lead us to the conclusion about the likelihood of rain

and about a person or device behind the door. The process of inference connects the grounds to

the conclusion.

In some cases, the grounds of inference and the steps leading from the grounds to the conclusion

can be expressed (either verbally or using some other symbolic system) such that someone else

can scrutinize the process and make an assessment its quality. For instance, given the

information that Zeno is a spider, we can infer that Zeno has eight legs. If we are asked to

express it verbally, we may do so as follows:

Zeno is a spider.

Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that Zeno has eight legs.

If we are asked how exactly the conclusion of Zeno having eight legs follows from Zeno being a

spider, we might flesh out our reasoning as follows:

Zeno is a spider.

All spiders have eight legs.

Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that Zeno has eight legs.

Likewise, given the information that Ledas room is 10 ft wide and 15 ft long, it is reasonable to

conclude that the area of the room is 150 sq ft. We can articulate the process of inference in a

combination of words and numbers as follows:

Width of Ledas room = 10 ft

Length of Ledas room = 15 ft

Hence, the area of Ledas room = 150 sq.ft

Reasoning is a form of inference that can be expressed in words or other symbols such that the

legitimacy of the process can be evaluated if needed.

Implicit in what we have said above is the idea that not all forms of inference can be overtly

expressed. Suppose you walk into an auditorium with a friend, look around at the seated people,

and tell your friend, There seems to almost a hundred people here. You didnt actually count

the number of people and arrive at this conclusion, instead, you made in inference, based on

your visual experience. If your friend challenged you to express the steps of your inference in

words or numbers, you may not be in a position to do so

Reasoning is an integral component of the various aspects of academic inquiry, including

i) looking for answers/solutions to questions/problems (methodology);

ii) justifying/proving our answers/solutions (justification); and

iii) evaluating the merit of the answers/solutions (critical thinking).

Given the centrality of reasoning in inquiry, it is important for us to understand the nature of

reasoning in academic inquiry. In what follows, we will explore forms of reasoning that can be

expressed in words (qualitative reasoning) or in numbers (quantitative reasoning).