Chapter 5: Reading and Evaluating Arguments

Learning Objectives: To recognize the elements of an argument To recognize types of arguments To evaluate arguments To recognize errors in logical reasoning

An argument presents logical reasons and evidence to support a viewpoint

Parts of an Argument ISSUE - problem or controversy about which people disagree CLAIM - the position on the issue SUPPORT - reasons and evidence that the claim is reasonable and should be accepted REFUTATION - opposing viewpoints

Types of Claims CLAIM OF FACT - statement that can be proven or verified by observation or research “Within ten years, destruction of rain forests will cause hundreds of plant and animal species to become extinct.”

Types of Claims CLAIM OF VALUE - states that one thing or idea is better or more desirable than another. “Requiring community service in high school will produce more community-aware graduates.”

Types of Claims CLAIM OF POLICY - suggests what should or ought to be done to solve a problem. “To reduce school violence, more gun and metal detectors should be installed in public schools.”

Types of Support REASON - a general statement that supports a claim. EVIDENCE - consists of facts, statistics, experiences, comparisons, and examples that show why the claim is valid. EMOTIONAL APPEALS - ideas that are targeted toward needs or values that readers are likely to care about.

Inductive and Deductive Arguments INDUCTIVE - reaches a general conclusion from observed specifics. “By observing the performance of a large number of athletes, you could conclude that athletes possess physical stamina.”

Inductive and Deductive Arguments DEDUCTIVE - begins with a major premise and moves toward a more specific statement or minor premise. “Athletes possess physical stamina. Because Anthony is an athlete, he must possess physical stamina.”

Strategies for Reading an Argument Think before your read! What does the title suggest? Preview! Who is the author, and what are his or her qualifications? What is the date of publication? What do I already know about the issue?

Strategies for Reading an Argument Read actively! Read once for an initial impression. Read the argument several more times. Annotate as you read. Highlight key terms. Diagram or map to analyze structure.

Strategies for Evaluating Arguments Evaluate Types of Evidence - Is it sufficient to support the claim? Personal Experience - may be biased, so do not accept it Examples - should not be used by themselves/as the sole evidence for a claim

Strategies for Evaluating Arguments Statistics - can be misused, manipulated or misinterpreted. Comparisons and Analogies - reliability depends on how closely they correspond to the situation. Relevancy and Sufficiency of Evidence - is there enough of the right kind to support the claim?

Strategies for Evaluating Arguments Definition of Terms - should be carefully defined and used consistently Cause-Effect Relationships - evidence that the relationship exists should be present Implied or Stated Value System - are they consistent with most value systems? Does the inclusion of these elements limit audience?

Strategies for Evaluating Arguments Recognizing and Refuting Opposing Viewpoints Question the accuracy, relevancy or sufficiency of the opponent’s evidence. Does the author address opposing viewpoints clearly and fairly? Does the author refute the opposing viewpoint with logic and relevant evidence?

Strategies for Evaluating Arguments Unfair Emotional Appeals Emotionally Charged or Biased Language Appeal to Emotion/Pity False Authority athletes endorsing underwear movie stars selling shampoo Association a car being named a Cougar to remind you of a sleek animal a cigarette advertisement featuring a scenic waterfall

Strategies for Evaluating Arguments Unfair Emotional Appeals Appeal to “Common Folk” an ad showing a product being used in an average household a politician suggesting he is like everyone else Ad Hominem - attack on the person rather than his/her viewpoint “Join the Crowd” Appeal or Bandwagon

What emotional appeal is being used? Come early so you won’t have to stand in line – because everyone knows you can make a deal with Dave and save. As a test pilot, Susan Gibbs knows performance. “That’s why I drive a Mustang,” she says. Olson’s pizzas are lower in fat and calories. Other pizza makers don’t care about your health.

Emotional appeals continued… “We can work magic with your children,” says Eileen of Eileen’s Day Care. “Call upon us, and your children will be happy you did.” Liberty Bell Airlines flies anywhere in this great land, from sea to shining sea. As a young man, Candidate Alan Wilson learned what it means to work hard by spending long hours lifting boxes and sweeping floors working in a department store.

Errors in Logical Reasoning commonly called logical fallacies invalidate the argument or render argument flawed Circular Reasoning/Begging the Question: logical fallacy in which the person making the claim begins with what they are trying to end with “Female police officers should not be sent to crime scenes because apprehending criminals is a man’s job.” Hasty Generalization: drawing a conclusion based on a small sample size, rather than looking at statistics that are much more in line with the typical or average situation. “Because one apple is sour, all of them in the bowl must be sour.” Burden of Proof: Arguing on the basis that it hasn't been proven beyond all doubt “I don’t trust metal detectors. I believe they cause cancer. No one knows if this is true, but it hasn’t been proven wrong yet either. So how can we know?”

Errors in Logical Reasoning Non Sequitur (“It Does Not Follow”): Conclusions do not follow logical reasoning. “Because my doctor is young, I’m sure she’ll be a good doctor.” False Cause: a cause is incorrectly identified. “Because I opened the umbrella when I tripped on the sidewalk, the umbrella must have caused me to trip.” Either-Or Fallacy: When only two choices are presented yet more exist, or a spectrum of possible choices exists between two extremes. “Because of the violence, TV must be either allowed or banned.” Argument Ad Nausem: Repetition of the same argument throughout a piece of writing.

For Each Argument: Identify the claim. Outline the reasons to support the claim. What types of evidence are used? Evaluate the adequacy and sufficiency of the evidence. What emotional appeals are used? Does the author recognize or refute counter arguments?

Comparing the Arguments: Compare the types of evidence used. Which argument did you find more convincing? Why? What further information would be useful in assessing the issue?

Read the articles on education and complete the activities following each selection. “School Boards Doing Little to Close Gap Between Whites, Minorities” “School Vouchers: The Wrong Choice for Public Education”