1 / 35

ARGUMENTATION UNIT

ARGUMENTATION UNIT. The reasoning behind the language!. Day 1: Boardwork!. When you come into class, you will find a statement or statements on the board. In a notebook on the first page write the following heading at the top: “Fallacies of Pseudoarguments .”

norton
Télécharger la présentation

ARGUMENTATION UNIT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ARGUMENTATION UNIT The reasoning behind the language!

  2. Day 1: Boardwork! • When you come into class, you will find a statement or statements on the board. • In a notebook on the first page write the following heading at the top: “Fallacies of Pseudoarguments.” • Pseudoarguments are arguments with lines of reasoning based on faulty reasoning or deception. • Write the following examples in your notebook, and write a prediction about what you believe to be the logical fallacy.

  3. What is the fallacy? • Ernie Eves is either incompetent and doesn’t know his own platform, or he is purposely misleading Ontario voters. • Dalton McGuinty. He’s an evil reptilian kitten-eater from another planet.

  4. Ad Hominem- To the man (personal attacks) • Why do people use ad hominem attacks? • - Lower credibility of the source. • - To take focus off of real issue • - Don’t have another response.

  5. Ad Hominem- To the man (personal attacks) • How to beat ad hominem attacks? • - Create a clear focus on issue, logical reasoning, and supporting material. • - If needed, then do a short appeal to the judge to focus on the issues.

  6. Pseudoargument #2 • Student A: “Don’t take Mrs. Ankiel’s class, she grades way too hard.” • Student B: “How do you know?” • Student A: “I received a bad grade on my report card last year.”

  7. Hasty Generalization- an inference drawn without sufficient evidence. • Tricks to catching a hasty generalization: • - When people say ALL or imply something happens with an entire population. • - People are making claims based on a limited number of examples. • You must have sufficient evidence: Generally one needs statistics created and interpreted correctly.

  8. Hasty Generalization- an inference drawn without sufficient evidence. • Defeating hasty generalizations: • - Offer numerous examples of exceptions to the hasty generalization. • - Offer a statistic supporting your examples as the norm, if possible.

  9. Pseudoargument #3 • SAT scores and ACT scores have high success predicting college success (i.e. graduation). • Person’s Response: “But I know someone who had a low ACT score and still graduated from college!”

  10. The “Person Who” fallacy: Saying a verifiable and statistically accurate trend is not true based on a few examples. • Note: Many of these arguments are based on people claiming your argument is a hasty generalization. • Defeating the “person who” fallacy: • - Emphasize the trend. • - Show examples of the trend being true.

  11. What is an Argument? • A fight between two people? • A fight between three people? • A reasoned position somebody presents as true.

  12. Four parts of an argument: • Claims- statements or assertions to be proven. • A claim should be controversial and take a stand. • A claim should always answer the question, “What is your point?” • Claims themselves are statements and NOT questions.

  13. Example Claims • The Electoral College should be abolished. • The legal age for drinking should be lowered. • Vegetarianism is the best diet choice. • NASA should launch a human expedition to Mars. • Don’t eat that mushroom! • We’d better stop for gas.

  14. After Claims Come: 2. Warrants- the principles behind the claim. (a.k.a. reasons why the claim is true)

  15. + WRITE YOUR OWN WARRANT FOR EACH OF THE EXAMPLE CLAIMS!

  16. The Electoral College should be abolished. • The Electoral College gives undue influence to some states. • The legal age for drinking should be lowered. • I’ve been drinking since I was 14 without problems! • Vegetarianism is the best diet choice. • It is the only diet not harming animals. • NASA should launch a human expedition to Mars. • Because doing so will unify America! • Don’t eat that mushroom! • It’s poisonous!! Ouch! • We’d better stop for gas. • The gauge has been reading empty for 30 miles!

  17. Assumptions 3. Assumptions- the logical and persuasive connections between the claim and the warrant. • Answers the questions, “How exactly do you get from the claim to the warrant?” and • “What must be true for the claim and warrant to be true?”

  18. Ex. 1:(Warrant) The Electoral College gives small states undue influence, therefore, (Claim) the Electoral College should be abolished. • Assumptions: • No state should have undue influence in Presidential elections. • Abolishing the Electoral College will give all states equal influence.

  19. Ex. 2: (Warrant) I’ve been drinking since age 14 without any problems, so (Claim) the legal drinking age should be lowered. • Assumption: • What works for me works for everyone else!

  20. Ex. 3:(Claim) Vegetarianism is the best choice of diet because (Warrant) vegetarianism is the only diet not harming animals. • Assumptions: • The most important reason for choosing a diet is whether or not a diet harms animals or not. • All other diets harm animals.

  21. Ex. 4:(Claim) NASA should launch a human expedition to Mars because (Warrant) Americans need a unifying goal. • Assumptions: • Americans don’t have something to unify behind. • Americans will unify behind an expedition to Mars.

  22. Ex. 5: (Claim) Don’t eat that mushroom; (Warrant) the mushroom is poisonous. • Assumption: • Eating poisonous things is dangerous.

  23. Ex. 6:(Claim) We’d better stop for gas because (Warrant) the gauge has been reading empty for more than 30 miles. • Assumptions: • The car cannot travel more than 30 miles on a gallon of gas. • We can find gas if we stopped right now.

  24. + People MUST believe the assumptions before you can be persuasive. • Ex. (Claim) Grades in high school should be abolished because (Warrant) I don’t like them. • Assumption: • What I don’t like should be abolished. • (Apparently, I’m special?)

  25. Warrants and assumptions tell you what arguments you have to make and at what level you have to make them. • If the warrant isn’t controversial, then defend the claim. • If the warrant is controversial, then defend the warrant, modify the warrant, or make a new warrant.

  26. EX:(Claim) Flat taxes are fairer than progressive taxes because (Warrant) flat taxes treat all people the same. • Assumption: • All people should be treated the same. • This assumption may be effective because the assumption, and therefore the warrant, address the all-American value of equality! (Hazzah!)

  27. BUT! • (a popularity issue?)

  28. (Claim) Progressive taxes are fairer than flat taxes because (Warrant) progressive taxes are based on peoples’ ability to pay. • Assumption: • Fairness is based on ability to pay.

  29. In our example, our warrant allows this counter-argument stating our tax is unfair to people who can’t afford to pay taxes. • What if you know the audience won’t accept the warrant or an assumption?

  30. Modified Example • (Claim) Flat taxes are preferable to progressive taxes because (Warrant) flat taxes simplify the tax code. • Assumptions: • A simple tax code is desirable. • Less fraud is desirable. • Paying taxes is easier. • Fewer rules makes things simple.

  31. Ground- the evidence supporting a claim or warrant. • Support the assumptions and warrants before the claim. • No point in defending any claim when the audience doesn’t believe the reason for the claim.

  32. Four types of grounds: • Emotional claim • Ethical claim • Logical claim • Factual claim (most used in debate) • Once the warrant and assumptions are defended, then defend the claim.

  33. Ground Example • (Claim) NASA should launch a human expedition to Mars because (Warrant) Americans need a unifying goal.  • Assumption: • Americans will unify behind a human expedition to Mars. • First, defend assumptions, if needed.

  34. WARRANT GROUNDS: • (Emotion) Americans want to be a part of something bigger than them. • (Ethical) A country as regionally, racially, and culturally divided as the US needs common purpose and values to hold the democratic system together. • (Logical) In the past, enterprises such as Westward expansion, WWII, and the Apollo moon program enabled many Americans to work toward a common goal.

  35. Then defend the claim. • CLAIM GROUNDS • (Fact) The American people are politically divided along lines of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, and class. • (Emotion) A common challenge or problem often unites people to accomplish great things. • (Logic) Successfully managing a human expedition to Mars requires cooperation of the entire nation financially, logistically, and scientifically. • (Logic) A human expedition to Mars would be a valuable scientific project for the nation to pursue. (CLAIM!)

More Related