Principles and Practices of Argumentation Exam 1 COMM 3310

What is the author's (Lakoff and Johnson) argument about the relationship between metaphors and reality? How do they think these two things interact?

"Metaphor is not just a matter of language, that is of mere words. We shall argue that on the contrary human thought processes are largely metaphorical. This is what we mean when we say that the human conceptual system is metaphorically structured and defined."(6) "The essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another" (5) "Our conceptual system thus plays a central role in defining our everyday realities. If we are right in suggesting that our conceptual system is largely metaphorical, then the way we think, what we experience, and what we do everyday is very much a matter of metaphor." (3)

What are some challenges to evaluating statistics

- Often we have little knowledge about how any specific statistic arrived to be as it is presented to us - Generalized or based off a sample? - Interpretation can be complex and changing - Opinion varies on reliability - Draw different conclusions - ambiguous

Define Terministic Screen in your own words

-A filter or perspective through which we use words or terminologies to communicate/argue. -How we communicate the perspective. -Language shapes our perspectives -Based on language and a symbolic -Knowing something exists even if you haven't seen it "We must use terministic screens, since we can't say anything without the use of terms; whatever terms we use they necessarily constitute a corresponding type of screen" (p. 50) A Terministic screen is a screen or lens through which people come to the acknowledgement of a language system that determines an individual's perception and symbolic action in the world. For Kenneth Burke, a terministic screen is a type of lens, that is composed of terms through with humans perceive the world. Basically it's the idea that all language makes a choice in some way that shapes how we see things.

Define Examples

1 specific case to a general case/many cases

Define Analogy

1 specific case to another specific case

How can we interpret statistics in a way that clarifies why they are relevant to the claim?

1) Breaking larger numbers down to more manageable figures. 2) Comparing obscure statistics to more familiar numbers

What are the three components of the Toulmin Model?

1) Claims 2) Support 3) Warrants

Functions of Definition (there are 5)

1) Clarify meaning (d-reports) 2) Suggest conclusions (argumentative definitions) 3) Deflect Meaning (euphemisms) 4) Facilitate defense or accusation (reclassification) 5) Redirect attention (labeling)

According to Herrick where do we derive definitions from?

1) Common Usage 2) Etymology 3) Paradigm Case 4) Original Intent

what are the 3 strategic uses definitions can have?

1) Euphemisms 2) Reclassification 3) Labeling

What are the three steps taken to evaluate a definition?

1) Is the definition circular? 2) Does the definition make a distinction without showing a difference? 3) Did the definition originate in an appropriate source?

What factors should we consider when deciding whether the leap between the sample and the generalization is reasonable

1) Size of sample 2) The Fallacy of hasty generalization- generalization based on a sample that is too small to support it 3) Stratification of the sample-sample that adequately reflects the various groups that introduce variation within the population 4) Randomness of the Sample- a sample in which every member of a given population had an equal chance of being selected for the sample.

What are three tools we can use to analyze argument?

1) scanning 2) standardizing 3) diagramming

What two questions should we answer when considering whether or not to accept a statistic?

1. Is the statistic reliable ? 2. Has the statistic been interpreted correctly?

definitions make a distinction without showing a difference

A definition that suggests that a category exists, without adequately explaining how objects in this category differ from objects in similar categories. A definition must identify differences.

Deductive Argument

Are arguments that lead to necessary conclusions when their reasons are true. - Draw necessary conclusions with their reasons are true - Typically involve moving from general principles to specific cases Leads to a Necessary Conclusion: a particular conclusion to which the reasons or premises in a deductive argument - when accepted as true - unavoidably lead. Inevitable Conclusion- the broad law applies, this specific case must be included. Rain makes you wet- if you're outside while it's raining, you're gonna get wet. ***starts with the general and moves to specific - It's raining outside, so I'm wet. ***

Inductive Argument

Are arguments whose reasons lead to a probable conclusion. - Draw probable conclusions when their reasons are true - Typically involve moving from specific observations to general conclusions. Leads to a Probable Conclusion: a conclusion that can be shown to be more or less likely, but not necessary. ***starts with a specific case and moves to the general - Im wet so its raining outside***

Define Function Arguments

Arguments from Function - Arguments that locate the essential nature of an object, event, or institution in its social or natural function. -Has function been identified correctly? -How is function Derived? - Arguments that show essential nature based on their function/purpose. - How does something function? ex) public vs private schools ex)the courts ex) police departments ex) "The mayor is wrong to suggest that the police are not doing enough about the underlying causes of crime in our city, police can do little about poverty, unemployment, access to guns, lack of parenting, abuse, and neglect." - Lists problems that a PD as an established function should not be called upon to address

Define Intent Arguments

Arguments that affirm that the meaning or essential nature of an object or document is revealed in the intended meaning of its authors or designers. -Does the author's intent govern interpretation in this case? -Has intent been represented accurately? -Do other considerations outweigh intent? - The intended meaning behind the person or thing being used - intended meaning of the maker/creator - often occurs in arguments about interpretations of The Constitution: what did our founding fathers mean when they wrote the constitution (can be interpreted in different ways)

Define Essential Nature arguments

Arguments that focus on the "essence: of unchanging nature of an organization, object, person, entity, or work of art.

Define Genetic Arguments

Arguments that look to origins as evidence of essential nature. -does the origin reveal Essence? -Is the origin account accurate? -Are present meanings or uses more important than the origin? - Origins as evidence - Doesn't literally mean genetic, just origin. - " we are all descendant of immigrants" - people talking about the confederate flag and how it stands for their origins

What functions does language serve, according to Burke?

Burke argues that all language is used and interpreted through terministic screens that direct attention toward certain elements or meanings. He differentiates between the scientistic and the dramatistic approaches to terministic screens, claiming that the scientistic screen is concerned with naming and definition, while a dramatistic approach is more concerned with language as an aspect of symbolic action. As Burke writes, "any nomenclature necessarily directs the attention into some channels rather than others" (45). These screens are created consciously and unconsciously and shape what we are able to perceive and communicate. Screens are often made up of differences in degree, rather than differences in kind. Screens must be sanctioned by the collective revelation in order to function properly.

What are the components of an argument?

Claim, reason, conclusion, and indicator

Define generalizations from a sample

Claims that take as their evidence a sample drawn from a population, and advance a conclusion about members of the entire population.

How would Burke's scientistic and dramatistic approaches help to explain Rorty's view of language?

Dramatistic approach would help to explain how Rorty views language creates our reality but is interpreted differently by everyone (filters). Ex. a bible verse Scientistic approach would help to explain how Rorty believe we come to know names and the definition of objects.

What functions do Lakoff & Johnson say metaphors serve?

Give new meaning to our pasts, daily activity, and to what we know and believe

Why does Rorty want us to stop thinking of language as a medium?

He talks about not viewing language as a medium for either expression or representation. It gives people the ability to set aside the ideas that both the self and reality have intrinsic natures, natures which are out there waiting to be known. He talks about language not being efficient. "does our use of these words get in the way of our use of other words? This is a question about whether our use of tools is inefficient, not a question about whether our beliefs are contradictory."

What are the two types of analogies, define them.

Literal Analogy -- A direct comparison between two allegedly similar items or cases (they play a useful role in arguments- they can clarify meanings, explain a complex process, emphasize the extent of a problem, or argue for fair treatment of a person or group) Metaphor/Figurative Analogy -- a comparison between things that are not of the same type, that come from different realms of experience. (provide excellent means of describing or clarifying a situation, they also help audiences visualize a situation or problem.

Define Person/Act Arguments

Person/act arguments -- an argument that looks to a persons or groups acts to find the true nature or character of that individual or group -Has this act been interpreted accurately? -Are the observed acts consistent with other acts by this person?

Define Narrative Arguments

Pros: - Narratives can be highly persuasive - Narratives have the capacity to render an idea plausible by putting it directly into the audience's stream of experience - Relatable - How ideas may work out in the real world and the mentions behind decisions. - Emotional Appeal - engaging the audience's emotions for the purpose of persuasion Cons: - Relative difficulty of presenting evidence in support of claims. "evidence" in narratives come from the audience's ability to believe that the story is true and genuine. - The loss of precision, detail, and comprehensive coverage in the presentation of the case.

Reclassification

Reclassification- redefining an action or idea to assist in accusation or defense. (NBA thing where a guy denied banning casual clothing from a press conference was merely a "dress code")

How do these two readings (Burke & Rorty) work together?

Rorty's reading kind of encompasses Burkes thoughts, although Rorty is more extreme. Rorty and Burke both believe language works to define our realities, but Rorty unlike Burke, does not think that language can a "mode of action" or cause action (scientistic vs dramatistic).

What are the 10 strategies of argument?

Stats Definitions Examples Analogies Narrative Metonymy Person/Act Intent Function Genetic (technically Visual as well- but that wont be on the test)

Difference between Definition report, and argumentative definition

The main difference between the two is that an argumentative definition is not widely accepted and isn't always accurate and well supported. They are strategic in that they are advanced to support debatable contentions and that's the function of an argumentative definition, and then a definition report is more to clarify and to give a widely accepted meaning.

Why is the distinction between claims that the world is out there and the truth is out there important for Rorty?

The world will always be out there but opinions and things about the world would not be. We can't think of the world without having language to describe it. language is contingent upon our realities and perspectives of the world which we communicate/describe through language. These are interdependent

DEAD metaphors

Things that are so common in language that they are no longer even seen as metaphors Ex: Fire-Fighting

For Rorty, how is truth made rather than found?

Truth has to be made because it cannot be out there- it cannot exist independently of the human mind because sentences cannot so exist or be out there without humans making it. For example the world can be there on its own without a human description but truth cannot be. Humans have to create truth.

Define Visual Arguments

Visual argument - arguments conveyed through images or objects rather than words - Does the image or object clearly sum up the essence of the subject so as to convey the advocate's intended conclusions? -Is the intended audience likely to embrace the value or principle that leads from the image to its implied conclusions? -Is the visual argument weakened by widely known facts that contradict its central claim?

Conclusion

a claim that has been reached by a process of reasoning

Define argumentative definition

a definition employed strategically to categorize an object or event so as that to support a particular conclusion to an argument. (can be controversial or surprising- they are more common than we may think)

Define a definition report

a definition that all parties to a debate agree upon, or that states a generally accepted or agreed upon meaning. (Definitions from dictionaries or authoritative sources)

Define Paradigm Case

a representative example of the term or category in question; a typical member that defines the entire category.

Reason

a statement advanced for the purpose of establishing a claim

Claim

a statement the advocate believes or is in the process of evaluating

what is a circular definition?

circular definition - definition of a term by reference only to factors inherent in or strongly implied by the definition itself. A circular definition eventually brings us back around to the original term, phrase, or criteria being defined

Labeling

employed for the purpose of dismissing or condemning an individual or group, rather than addressing the argument. (labeling is often used in place of an actual argument, ex: political arena- terms such as red-necked conservatives or femi-nazis)

Define Scanning

identifying and marking the statements in an argument, as well as underlining indicators and cues

What counts as the best source of a definition depends on context?

if you're doing a law paper the definitions need to be law related.

Dramatistic

language as act symbolic action "thou shalt, or thou shalt not" Consideration that human beings are actors on the stage of life (in a play) Dramatistic -action -observation -symbolic action In my sense of the term, as treated schematically in my Grammar Motives, it is "A technique of analysis of language and thought as basically modes of action rather than as means of conveying information." p. 54

Scientistic

language as definition, naming. Definition itself is a symbolic action "It is, or is not" p. 44 dramatism is basically saying that humans are actors on the stage which is life- analyzing people like you would a play. It is a technique of analysis of language and thought as basically modes of action rather than as means of conveying information and that's what Scientistic is - it's a means of action rather than information because language is not adequate.

Define Standardizing

making each statement or implied statement in the argument a complete sentence, changing indefinite references such as pronouns to the definite nouns they represent, and placing reasons above the conclusions they support.

Define Diagramming

mapping the argument using only the letters assigned during scanning, and drawing lines from reasons to the conclusion they support.

Indicator

provide important clues to identifying an argument's reasons and conclusions. They are words and phrases such as "because" and "therefore" that provide important clues to identifying reasons and conclusions in an argument. Evidence: a reason in observation either yours or someone else's. Function -- it can be derived from expert testimony, eyewitness, reports, statistical reports, surveys, etc. They can be shows to be true or false.

Connectives

reasons that consist of beliefs, values, assumptions, or generalizations that link evidence to conclusion. Are reasons that reflect personal commitments or generalizations that are widely accepted. Function -- they can not necessarily be demonstrated as true or false- they are often assumed, presupposed, or taken for granted.

Metaphorical Expression

specific statement about something (evidence about that specific concept) Our relationships is hitting a dead end. Ive wasted so much time, i spend my time doing...

Propositions of value

statements that advance judgment about morality, beauty, merit, or wisdom. Ex: Capital Punishment is immoral. Cloud Atlas was a terrible movie. The Boston Celitcs team of the 1970's was the best basketball team ever. The US decision to not intervene during the Syrian revolution was unconscionable- even though it's about a policy it's weighing a policy's value. VALUE DEFINITION IN CLASS → this is not always true but most value statements involve is or os not - if you are assessing or appraising something you often say this is or is not... (followed by a value). ASSESSING VALUE OF SOMETHING. Often equated to opinion it's a statement NOT a call to action. What is the thing the author wants me to accept? ***Guns are bad

Propositions of fact

statements that report describe, predict, or make causal claims. Ex: Support for a national medical insurance system will increase over the next 5 years. Boulder is the most populous city in the world. Housing starts were up in august. Super storm Sandy was a direct result of global warming. FACT DEFINITION IN CLASS → cause and effect, statements about what caused things in the past or will happen in the future. Ex: super storm sandy was a result of global warming - attributing cause to something. If the goal of the argument is to report or describe something alone. ***guns have killed X amount of people this year.

Propositions of policy

statements that urge that an action be taken or discontinued. Ex: the Jamaican space program (JASA) should be abandoned. Abortion should be made legal. POLICY DEFINITION IN CLASS → we should change gun laws. Explicitly telling you to do something or not do something or to support something or not support something - it's trying to get a change. More of a call to action. ***we should change gun laws

Define Sampling

statistically selecting and observing members of a group or population who are taken to be representative of the rest of the group

Contingent

subject to chance; occurring or existing only if (certain other circumstances) are the case/ dependent on.

Euphemism

substituting innocuous terms for potentially offensive terms. (He passed away rather than he died)

Define (according to the Toulmin Model) Support

support can be comprised of reasons (often sub-claims), data, anecdotal evidence, authoritative testimony, and personal experience. example: The broncos have a great defense

Dissociation

techniques of separation which have the purpose of dissociation, separating, disuniting elements which are regarded as forming a whole or at least a unified group within some system of thought.

Define Common Usage

the meaning of a term in everyday language

Define Original Intent

the meaning of a word or phrase in its original context, or what the initial definer of a term meant by it.

Define Etymology

the origin of a word

Define Metonymy

the substitution of the name of an attribute or adjunct for that of the thing meant, for example Crown for Queen

Define (according to the Toulmin Model) Claims

these are simply statements or assertions one hopes to prove. We can think of them as theses by they should be contestable. That means that they are not simply statements of fact, and that they are also not beliefs that are widely accepted, they are controversial. example: The Broncos will win the super bowl

To define is to:

to advance a meaning for a word or to classify an object, person or act.

Association

understand schemes which bring separate elements together and allow us to establish a unity among them which aims either at organizing them or at evaluating them + or - by means of one another.

Define (according to the Toulmin Model) Warrants

warrants are persuasive and logical connections between claims and support. We might also call warrants the assumptions or premises of the arguments. example: The team with the best defense wins the super bowl

Metaphorical Concept

what is this a metaphor for? (specific concept) Love is a journey. Time is money

What is presence, and how does it function in argument?

when you place an idea in the audiences head and make it seem relevant, not about repetition but calling something in to being relevant to the argument. Something has relevance to the argument at hand, you invoking something and giving it presence in the argument and say thing that it is something that should be considered in relation to your claim.