1. LOGOS ETHOS PATHOS Aristotle’s Proofs

2. Logos Arguments rooted in logic and/or reasoning Uses evidence to support positions Ways to use Logos  Inductive  Deductive  Causal  Analogical

3. Inductive Reasoning that goes from particular to general Example:  Jane is in great shape, and she jogs. (Observation)  Bill looks terrific, and he jogs. (Observation)  Kim’s great muscle definition is from jogging. (Observation, Inference)  Therefore, people who jog look good. (Generalization)

4. Evaluating Inductive Arguments Are the observations accurate? Are there enough observations to justify the generalization? Don’t Rush to Conclusions!

5. Evaluation Examples Example 1  Jimmy plagiarized his Com 299 final paper.  All Com 299 students plagiarize. Example 2  My cat is gray.  My sister’s cat is gray.  The cat at the pet store is gray.  All cats are gray.

6. Deductive Arguments Reasoning that goes from general to specific. Example:  If you jog, you will look like you’re in shape. (Major Premise)  Jane jogs. (Minor Premise)  Therefore, Jane looks like she’s in good shape. (Conclusion)

7. More Deductive Examples Example 1, from MLK, Jr “I Have a Dream”  All people are created equal.  I am a person.  Therefore, I am equal to other people. Example 2  God will reward non-violence  We are pursuing our dreams non-violently  God will grant us our dreams

8. Evaluating Deductive Arguments Analyze the accuracy and validity  Are the premises true?  Can the conclusion be logically derived from the premises?

9. Evaluating Deductive Arguments Continued Compare the following deductive arguments  Example 1  People who text and drive are more likely to have accidents than are those who do not.  Jack regularly texts while he drives.  Therefore, Jack is more likely to have an accident than those who do not text and drive.  Example 2  People who do not text and drive are more likely to have accidents than are those who do.  Jill never texts and drives.  Therefore, Jill is more likely to have an accident than those who do text and drive

10. Causal One condition brings about another Avoid False Cause Fallacies  Ensure that A causes B!

11. Analogical Compares something unfamiliar to the audience to something that is/could be familiar Avoid an invalid analogies

12. Ethos Is derived from the speaker or the source of the information Is composed of competence, character, knowledge, etc of the speaker/source

13. Pathos Appeals to audience’s emotions  The emotions can range from glee to fear The speaker/writer should always consider the ethics of the communication

14. FACT VALUE POLICY Types of Claims

15. Claims of Fact What IS or IS NOT true  Past, present, projection  Something that can be researched and proven through research Burden of Proof  Must define terms, what do your statistics mean?  How does your evidence “prove” something

16. Claims of Value What is right/wrong, moral/immoral, good/bad, just/unjust  Always involves quality judgments Burden of Proof  Define terms…what does it mean to you to be moral/immoral  Identify the criteria or standard by which to evaluate the claim of value

17. Claims of Policy What should be done  Will always involve an agent of action Burden of proof  Problem exists  An inherent barrier to solving the problem  An action statement to attempt to correct the problem

18. Americans overvalue athletic competition. VALUE

19. The United States prison system should increase programs to rehabilitate inmates. POLICY

20. Fastening seatbelts saves lives. FACT

21. The United States federal government should substantially increase the number of and/or substantially expand beneficiary eligibility for its visas for one or more of the following: employment-based immigrant visas, nonimmigrant temporary worker visas, family- based visas, human trafficking-based visas. POLICY

22. Computer technology will change American education. FACT

23. Political parties are bad for effective government in the United States. VALUE

24. HOW TO CONSTRUCT AN ARGUMENT IN ANY SPEECH OR DISCUSSION Toulmin’s Model of Argumentation CLAIMEVIDENCE CREDIBILITY WARRANTQUALIFIERREBUTTAL

25. Claim An assertion regarding a stance on a topic or idea It is an assertion of fact, value, or policy Posting private information on social networking sites like Facebook poses significant security risks.

26. Evidence Credibility The qualifications of the author of the quoted work In debate the evidence credibility is not fully stated in a debate round, but is typed and available for examination by opponents  In a debate round ONLY the LAST NAME and YEAR of the article/source is read aloud Regular Speech Example:  According to the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property web site developed by the Cyberstalking Division of the U.S. Department of Justice and accessed on September 6, 2008 Debate Example  U.S. Department of Justice, Accessed 2008

27. Evidence The quoted words used in debate to support the claim originally made Is created by reading only important underlined material from an article. When making evidence for debate all words in a paragraph or between paragraphs of quoted material must be present (though not read aloud) to ensure that nothing is taken out of context

28. Warrant THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF TOULMIN’S MODEL! Connects the Evidence to the claim Explains WHY the evidence matters and how you are interpreting/applying the evidence to your position/claim

29. Qualifier The exceptions to the rule  This is where one admits that sometimes a claim is not true in all instances Cats are the Best Pet Smith, 2013 “Cats are very loving creatures” Claim EV Cred EV Possible Qualifiers?

30. Rebuttal These are any counter-arguments or oppositions to a stated claim As a debater you should research BOTH sides of the topic so as to anticipate what your opponent(s) may say in opposition to you. Possible rebuttal to “Cats are the Best pets.”?

31. Argument Fallacies Bandwagon Slippery Slope False Analogy Red Herring False Cause Others?