Writing Arguments

1
Writing Arguments
2
Arguments of Fact

• Factual arguments come in many varieties with
  different standards of proof.
• What they have in common is an attempt to
  establish whether something is sothat is,
  whether claims made about something is true.
• Facts may seem dispassionate, yet, facts become
  arguments when they are controversial in
  themselves or when they are used to educate
  people, challenging or changing their beliefs.

3

• Arguments of fact do much of the heavy lifting in
  our world.
• Some of them do the important task of reporting
  on what has been recently discovered or become
  known.
• Such arguments may also explore the implications
  of new information and the conflicts that may
  follow from it.
• Wikileaks

4

• Some factual arguments make the public aware of
  information that is already available to everyone
  willing to do the work of finding it and studying
  its implications.
• Serious factual arguments almost always have
  consequences, especially those that touch on
  public issues.
• Hydrogen energy
• Social Security/Medicare
• Fair Taxes (factcheck.org)

5

• For the same reason, we need arguments that
  correct or challenge beliefs and assumptions held
  widely within a society on the basis of
  inadequate or incomplete information.
• Corrective arguments appear daily in the national
  media, often based on more detailed studies by
  scientists, researchers, or thinkers that the
  public may not encounter.
• Factual arguments also routinely address broader
  questions about the history or myths societies
  want to believe about themselves.

6
Characterizing Factual Arguments

• Factual arguments tend to be driven by
  perceptions and evidence.
• A writer first notices something new or different
  or mistaken and wants to draw attention to that
  fact.
• Researchers notice a pattern or behavior
  explaining questions such as What if? Or How
  come?
• They are also motivated by curiosity or
  suspicion
• If being fat is so unhealthy, why arent
  mortality rates rising?

7

• National Highway Safety Administration claim that
  car seats for children were 54 percent effective
  in preventing deaths in auto crashes for children
  below the age of four.
• Stephen J. Dubner and Steve Levitt, authors of
  Freakonomics, challenged the claim in a New York
  Times Op-ed column The Seat Belt Solution,
  posed the question about the factual claim
• But 54 percent effective compared with what?

8

• The answer Compared with a childs riding
  completely unrestrained.
• Their initial question would lead them to a more
  focused inquiry, then to a database on auto
  crashes, then to a surprising conclusion For
  kids above age 24 months, those in car seats
  might be statistically safer than those without
  protection, but they apparently werent any safer
  than those confined by much simpler, cheaper, and
  more readily available devicesseat belts.

9
Key Features of Factual Arguments

• In drafting a factual argument, make sure you do
  the following
• Describe the situation that leads you to raise
  questions about the facts in a given situation.
• Make a claim that addresses the status of the
  facts as theyre known. Youll usually be
  establishing, challenging, or correcting them.
• Offer substantial and authoritative evidence to
  support your claims.

10

• In academic situations, a claim typically comes
  first, with the evidence trailing after.
• Its not unusual for arguments of fact to present
  evidence first, then build toward a claim or
  thesis.
• Such a structure invites readers to participate
  in the process by which a factual claim is made
  (or challenged).
• The argument unfolds with the narrative drive of
  a mystery story, with readers eager to know what
  point the evidence is leading to.

11
Arguments of Definition
12
Understanding Arguments of Definition

• A creature is an endangered species or it isnt
• An act was harassment or it wasnt
• A person deserves official refugee status or
  doesnt
• How does one define human intelligence?

13

• Arguments of definition can wield the power to
  say what someone or something is or can be.
• What you call something matters, that is what
  definitions are all about.
• Another way to approach definitional arguments is
  to think of what comes between the is and is
  not.
• The most productive definitional arguments
  probably occur in this murky realm.
• It is important to realize that many political,
  social, and scientific definitions are constantly
  under construction, reargued and reshaped
  whenever they need to be updated for the times.

14

• After horrifying photographs of U.S. soldiers
  holding Iraqi prisoners on leashes and otherwise
  abusing and humiliating them became public, and
  reports indicated that other detainees in Iraq
  and elsewhere had endured even harsher treatment,
  a fierce debate over what constituted torture
  broke out.

15

• Amnesty International defines torture as the
  deliberate infliction of severe pain or suffering
  by state agents, or similar acts by private
  individuals for which the state bears
  responsibility through consent, acquiescence or
  inaction.
• We also use the term torture to refer to
  deliberate infliction of pain or suffering
  inflicted by members of armed political groups.

16

• Under this definition, many abuses at Abu Ghraib
  and elsewhere would be deemed torture.
• Others, however, argued for a different
  definition, saying these acts were primarily the
  use of traditionally unconventional methods of
  interrogation.

17
Kinds of Definitional Arguments

• Because there are different kinds of definitions,
  there are also different ways to make a
  definitional argument.
• Formal Definitions
• Operational Definitions
• Definitions by Example

18
Formal Definitions

• Formal definitions are what you find in
  dictionaries.
• Such definitions involve placing a term in its
  proper genus and species.
• First determining the larger class to which it
  belongs and then identifying the features that
  distinguish it from other members of that class.

19
Hybrid Cars

• Genus
• Place among peersvehicles with two or more
  sources of power.
• Formal definition
• Identify features necessary to distinguish hybrid
  cars from other multiply powered vehicles

• Species
• Does a category of objects or ideas really belong
  to the larger class
• Are all hybrids really powered by two sources or
  are some of them just dressed up versions?
• Ford Escape?

20

• Questions related to genus
• Is tobacco a drug or a crop?
• Is hate speech a right protected by the First
  Amendment?
• Questions related to species
• Is tobacco a harmless drug? A dangerously
  addictive drug? Something in between?
• Is using a racial epithet always an instance of
  hate speech?

21
Operational Definitions

• Identify an object or idea not by what it is so
  much as by what it does or by the conditions that
  create it.
• Arguments arise from Operational Definitions when
  people debate what the conditions are that define
  something or whether these conditions have been
  met.

22

• Questions related to conditions
• Is a volunteer who is paid still a volunteer?
• Does someone who uses steroids to enhance
  home-run hitting performance deserver the title
  Hall of Famer?

• Questions related to Fulfillment of Conditions
• Was the compensation given to the volunteer
  really pay or just reimbursement for expenses?
• Should Player X, who used steroids prescribed
  for a medical reason, be ineligible for the Hall
  of Fame?

23
Definitions by Example

• Define a class by listing its individual members.
• Arguments of this sort focus on who or what may
  be included in a list that defines a category.
• Great movies
• Natural disasters
• Planets
• Such arguments often involve comparisons and
  contrasts with the items most readers would agree
  from the start.

24
Questions related to membership in a named class

• Is any pop artist today in a class with Chuck
  Berry, Elvis Presley, or the Beatles?
• Are comic books, now sometimes called graphic
  novels, literature?
• Who are the Albert Einsteins or Madam Curies of
  the current generation?

25

• Many issues of definitions cross the line among
  the types described here and some other forms of
  argument.

26
Key Features of Definitional Arguments

• When writing an argument of definition of your
  own, it is likely to include the following parts
• A claim involving a question of definition
• A general definition of some key concept
• A careful look at your subject in terms of that
  general definition
• Evidence for every part of the argument
• A consideration of alternative views and
  counterarguments
• A conclusion, drawing out the implications of the
  argument.

27
Evaluations
28
Evaluations are everyday arguments.

• By the time you leave home in the morning, you
  have probably made a dozen informal evaluations.
• What to wear
• What to eat for breakfast
• Which coffee to buy
• Which playlist to listen to

29

• Many would choke at the notion of debating causal
  or definitional claims will happily spend hours
  appraising the Minnesota Vikings, Greenbay
  Packers, San Francisco Giants or LA Lakers
• Other evaluative spectacles in our culture
  include
• Award shows
• Beauty pageants
• Best/worst dressed lists
• Public/political polls

30
Criteria of Evaluation

• The particular standards we establish for judging
  anything, whether an idea, a work or art, a
  person, or a product.
• Why make such a big deal about criteria when many
  act of evaluation seem almost effortless?
• Because we should be most suspicious of our
  judgments precisely when we start making them
  carelessly.
• Its a cop-out to think that everyone is entitled
  to their opinion, however stupid and uninformed
  it might be.
• Evaluation always requires reflection.

31
Characterizing Evaluation

• Quantitative Evaluation
• Once you have defined a quantitative standard,
  making judgments should be as easy as measuring
  and counting.
• Like any standard of evaluation, quantitative
  criteria must be scrutinized carefully to make
  sure what you measure relates to what is being
  evaluated.
• Even the most objective measures have limits.
• They have been devised by fallible people looking
  at the world from their own limited perspectives.

32
Iraq Coalition Military Fatalities By Year
Year US UK Other Total
2003 486 53 41 580
2004 849 22 35 906
2005 846 23 28 897
2006 822 29 21 872
2007 904 47 10 961
2008 314 4 4 322
2009 149 1 0 150
2010 57 0 0 57
Total 4427 179 139 4745
33
Qualitative Evaluations

• Many issues of evaluation closest to peoples
  hearts simply arent subject to quantitative
  measures.
• What makes a great movie?
• Establishing subtle criteria is what can make
  arguments of evaluation interesting.
• They require you to challenge conventional wisdom.

34
Key Features of Evaluations

• An evaluative claim that makes a judgment about a
  person, idea, or object.
• Having established a claim, you would explore the
  implications of your belief, drawing out the
  reasons, warrants, and evidence that might
  support it.
• Claims can be stated directly, or in rare
  instances, strongly implied.

35
Consider the differences between the following
claims and burden of proof required.

• Jon Stewart is the most important entertainer of
  this decade.
• Jon Stewart is one of the three or four most
  important TV entertainers of this decade.
• Jon Stewart may come to be regarded as one of the
  three or four most important TV comedians of this
  decade.

36
The criterion or criteria by which youll measure
your subject.

• Most often neglected in evaluations is the
  discussion of criteria.
• Criteria can make or break a piece.
• Dont take criteria of evaluation for granted.
• If you offer vague, dull, or unsupported
  criteria. Youre most likely to be challenged.

37
Presenting Evidence

• Evidence that the particular subject meets or
  falls short of the stated criteria.
• The more evidence the better in an evaluation,
  provided that the evidence is relevant.
• Select evidence most likely to impress your
  readers, and arrange the argument to build toward
  your best material.

38
Causal Arguments
39
Understanding Causal Arguments

• Causal arguments exist in many forms and
  frequently appear as part of other arguments
  (such as evaluations or proposals).
• Causal arguments can be separated into three
  major categories.
• Arguments that state a cause and then examine its
  effect(s).
• Arguments that state an effect and then trace the
  effect back to its cause(s).
• Arguments that move through a series of links A
  causes B, which leads to C and perhaps D

40
Arguments that state a cause and then examine one
or more of its effects

• What would happen if openly homosexual men and
  women were allowed to join (or stay in) the
  American military?
• Effect B
• Cause A leads to Effect C
• Effect D

41
Arguments that begin with an effect and then
trace the effect back to one or more causes.

• Cause A
• Effect D results from Cause B Cause C
• Hollywood experiences a record-breaking slump in
  movie going in 2005.

42
(No Transcript)
43
Arguments that move through a series of links

• Cause A leads to Cause B leads to Cause
  C leads to Effect D
• New law regulating smokestack emissions from
  utility plants is needed because
• Emissions from utility plants in the Midwest
  cause acid rain
• Acid rain causes death of trees and other
  vegetation
• Powerful lobbyists have prevented states from
  passing laws of control emissions from these
  plants
• As a result, acid rain will destroy most eastern
  forests by 2020.

44
Characterizing Causal Arguments

• They are often part of other arguments
• They are almost always complex
• They are often definition based
• They usually yield probable rather than absolute
  conclusions.

45
Key Features of Causal Arguments

• Thoroughly question every cause-and-effect
  relationship in the argument.
• Show that the causes and effects youve suggested
  are highly probably and backed by evidence or
  show what is wrong with faulty causal reasoning
  you may be critiquing.
• Assess any links between causal relationships
• Show that your explanations of any causal chains
  are accurate
• Show that plausible cause-effect explanations
  have not been ignored.

46
Post hoc, ergo proctor hoc fallacy

• after this, therefore because of this
• Causal arguments are prone to this kind of
  fallacious argument
• Occurs when a writer asserts a causal
  relationship between two entirely unconnected
  events.

47
Proposals
48

• Proposals always call for some kind of action.
• They aim at getting something done.
• Proposals give evidence and arguments to persuade
  people to choose a course of action.
• Proposal arguments must appeal to more than good
  sense.
• Proposals need to focus on particular audiences,
  especially on people who can get something done.

49
Proposals

• A should do B because of C
• The U.S. Congress should repeal the Health Care
  bill
• Because people should not be forced to buy
  insurance
• Proposals can be roughly divided into 2 kinds
• Proposals about practices
• Proposals about policies

50

• Proposals about Practices
• The city should use brighter light bulbs on
  residential streets.
• The NCAA should implement a playoff system to
  determine its Division I football champion.
• Proposals about Policies
• The state should increase minimum wage
• The Supreme Court should pay greater attention to
  the Tenth Amendment, which restricts the role of
  the federal government to powers enumerated in
  the Constitution.

51
Developing Proposals

• Define a need or a problem.
• Make a strong and clear claim.
• Show that the proposal addresses the need or
  problem.
• Show that the proposal is feasible.