1. dharris@marjon.ac.uk http://www.arasite.org/

2. Usual Advice # 1  Avoid certain kinds of “argument”  Arksey & Harris ( 2007) ch. 5: avoid personal rant, ad hominem, over-generalised argument  Bonnett ( 2001) ch.3: avoid circular, reductionist, telelogical argument

3. Usual advice #2  Good arguments are structured in certain ways  Arksey & Harris suggest summary plus comment  Bonnett – discuss alternative interpretations or views together with supporting or contrary “evidence”  Flow-chart approaches: state your views; support with evidence; state contrary views; support with evidence; discuss strengths and weaknesses

4. Theories of Argument  Arguments are not just logical but rhetorical, persuasive. Even (sports) science ones.  Need full picture to include rhetoric  Toulmin: the role of claims, data, warrants (a way of authorising claims from data), qualifiers, rebuttals (aimed specifically at the warrant), and backing.  Varies by context?

5. Toulmin -- see Lunsford (2002)  D So, Q,C   Since W unless R   On account of B   D= data; Q= qualifier; C=claim; W=warrant; R= rebuttal; B=backing

6. Universal Argument?  Habermas and the “ideal speech act” (see Ray 2004)  Challenging validity in 4 main ways:  Is the claim true, does it describe an actual state of affairs as accurately as possible?  Is the claim effective, well-formed, logical, plausible and comprehensible?  Is the claim appropriate according to what is normally expected and required?  Is the claim a genuine expression of the claimant's views -- is it sincere?

7. References  Arksey, H. and Harris, D. (2007) How to Succeed in Your Social Science Degree, London: Sage  Bonnett, A. (2001) How to Argue: a student’s guide, London: Pearson Education Ltd  Bourdieu, P., Passeron, J-C., and de Saint Martin, M. (1994) Academic Discourse, Oxford: Polity Press  Harris, D. (no date) ‘Study Skills’ [online] http://www.arasite.org/studyskills/sskillsmenu.html http://www.arasite.org/studyskills/sskillsmenu.html  Latour, B. (1987) Science in Action, Cambridge: Harvard University Press  Lunsford, K. (2002) ‘Contextualising Toulmin‘s Model in the Writing Classroom. A Case Study’, Written Communication 19(1): 109—74  Ray, L. (2004) ‘Pragmatism and Critical Theory’, European Journal of Social Theory 7(3): 307--21

8. The Academic Context?  “Strategic communication” in academic life – motives other than pure argument?  Academic work really about conforming not creativity? – Bourdieu et al (1994).  Nice practical advice to end:  Get the hang by reading academic work (or critical studies of it)  Research and decode your local criteria and power structures