COMM 3840 CH 4-7 test

Paradigm

a conceptual framework; a universal model that calls people to view events through a common interpretive lens

Claim (1)

a statement that the arguer wants accepted

Objective argumentation

the goal of all arguers and has 3 characteristics

Backing

•What is the REASON to SUPPORT the WARRANT •Toulmin argued that since warrants are not self validating, there needs to be a reason a warrant should be believed •Used to modify the warrant to gain adherence

Solvency and Topicality

•Will the proposed solution fix the problem AND •Requires the advocate to stay relevant to the topic area being discussed in the argument

Narration

•symbolic actions--words/deeds--that have sequence and meaning for those who live, create, or interpret them - Rooted in time and space - Covers every aspect of life with regard to character, motive, and action - Verbal and nonverbal messages

Stasis Point

•the place where disagreement begins: - The most important thing to decide as an arguer - Where you disagree with an opponent and determines direction of the debate

Propositions

A statement that expresses a subject of a dispute

Stasis

A well written proposition creates clash

Interesting

Account for the arguers AND the audience

Definition of Argument

Any situation in which a CLAIM is made, SUPPORT is offered, and it is in the context of a DISAGREEMENT. 4th part of the definition: an ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE someone

Sponsored Content

Content that is back by a particular group or company in order to boost the brand or business

Modern Barriers

Fake News, Alternative Facts, Sponsored Content and Fauxtography

Historical Barriers

Ignorance, incorrect information and bias

Who made alternative facts mainstream?

Kellyanne Conway made this mainstream when discussing the crowd side at Trump's Inauguration

Hasty Generalization

Making assumptions about a whole group or range of cases based on a sample that is inadequate - usually because it is atypical or just too small.

What can sponsored content do?

Not malicious but can obscure objective argumentation

Ad Hominem

Shifts attention to the personality or appearance of the arguer. 1.) Person A makes claim X 2.) Person B makes an attack on person A. 3.) Therefore A's claim is false.

What have brought unique challenges to finding accurate and objective information?

The 21st century and the rise of the internet

Claim (2)

There are THREE types of claims

Begging the question

When an arguer essentially restates the claim as the reason for the claim

Red Herring

When an arguer introduces an irrelevant topic into a debate to divert attention from the original issue

Support

any additional backing or information that bolsters the claim

Policy

claims advocating courses of action that should be undertaken

Value

claims involving opinions, attitudes, and subjective evaluations of things

Fact

claims which focus on empirically verifiable phenomena

Disagreement

context matter

Click bait

designed to make readers want to click on a headline, especially when the link leads to content of dubious value or interest

Continued-Influence Effect

even after misinformation is retracted, many people continue to treat it as true

Multiple barriers

have historically existed to objective argumentation

Valid but not sound

major premise: All cats are pink minor premise: Felix is a cat conclusion: Therefore, Felix is pink Cats aren't pink, which makes the first premise untrue. Validity, however, presumes the truth of the premises.

Valid and sound

major premise: Anthrax is not a communicable disease minor premise: Communicable diseases pose the greatest threat to public health conclusion: Therefore, anthrax does not pose the greatest threat to public health The premises are true and the conclusion is valid, that is, it necessarily follows from the premises

Fake News

malicious stories created with no intent for the search of truth (Disinformation vs Misinformation)

Aristotle

one of the first scholars to study the logical forms of argument - the syllogism

Alternative Facts

partial truths, half-truths, and outright lies spread for the purpose of a particular agenda/position.

Burden of proof

the obligation to support ideas presented and prove a change should be made

Status quo

what is currently happening and/or the current state of affairs

Slippery Slope

when an arguer objects to something, not necessarily because it is undesirable, but because it may lead to something else that is undesirable

Deductive reasoning

• A logical process where a specific, guaranteed conclusion is determined from general premise(s) • This form of reasoning is notable because it is the ONLY form of logical reasoning where the conclusion is CERTAIN. •If the PREMISES are TRUE, the conclusion is necessarily TRUE - Taking a person's life is always wrong. - Capital punishment involves taking a person's life. - Therefore, capital punishment is always wrong. •All students eat pizza, Joe is a student at UNT, therefore..........

Fallacies

• Ad Populum • Ad hominem • Appeal to Tradition • Appeal to Fear • Appeal to Emotion • Slippery Slope • False Dichotomy • Single Cause • Hasty Generalization • Begging the Question • Red Herring • Post hoc ergo propter hoc

Appeal to Tradition

• An arguer asserts that because something has always been done a certain way, it should continue to be that way, or that because something is older, it must be better • An arguer should be able to justify a claim on something more than age

What is a fallacy

• An argument that is flawed by irrelevant, or inadequate evidence, erroneous reasoning, or improper expression. • Fallacies are defects that weaken arguments. • It is sometimes hard to evaluate whether an argument is fallacious. They can be located in 3 places of an argument: - Appeal • Relevancy • Adequate sampling - Reasoning • Rationale - Language • Based on strategic or psychological appeal

Types of inductive reasoning

• Argument by example • Argument by analogy • Argument by causal Correlation

Types of abductive reasoning

• Competing hypothesis • Empirical argument • Inference of the best Explanation

Logical Fallacy - Deductive Logic

• Deductive fallacies: Result from a failure to follow the logic of a series of statements. • Deductive reasoning is from known premises, or premises presumed to be true (generalities), to a certain conclusion. • Starts out with a general statement, or hypothesis, and examines the possibilities to reach a specific, logical conclusion. • Working large to small. • All Doctors have college degrees, Dr. Allison has a college degree

Appeal to Fear

• Exaggerate the dangers beyond their statistical likelihood • Fear Mongering - use of fear to influence the opinions and actions of others towards some specific end • They are often used to stampede legitimate fears into panic or prejudice - anti-immigration movement

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

• Fancy Latin term that means, "after this, therefore because of this" • When an arguer assumes that because one thing happened after another, it must have been a result of the previous event or thing • The current anti-vaccination movement is based in this fallacious logic

Why does this matter?

• Helps dismiss weaker arguments and Helps find stronger arguments. • Gives everyone a vocabulary for quickly understanding why bad arguments should be dismissed. • They represent reasoning that is in some way faulty or that is likely to be rejected by a particular audience. • Can solicit response either way - ???

Conditional syllogism

• If/then syllogism •This syllogism argues that if a particular thing occurs, then something else will occur as a result •The MAJOR premise is concerned with an UNCERTAIN condition - Major premise: If Mike likes Mindy, then he'll ask her to the prom. - Minor premise: Mike likes Mindy, - Conclusion: Therefore, he'll ask her to the prom. Presumed VALID if the minor premise is able to AFFIRM the major premise

Stephen Toulmin

• In 1958 published "The Uses of Argument" to defend his belief that abstract logic did not account for how people were applying a rational justification • Emphasizes that logic often based on probability rather than certainty • 6 components for diagraming arguments

Logical Fallacy - Inductive Logic

• Inductive fallacies: Result from the wrong use of evidence. • Inductive reasoning takes specific information and makes a broader generalization that is considered probable, allowing for the fact that the conclusion may not be accurate. • Think of it as small to big. Most everyday arguments involve inductive reasoning. Reasoning from uncertain premises to probabilistic conclusions • Michael just moved here from Chicago. Michael has red hair, therefore people from Chicago have red hair. • All chickens that we have seen have been brown; so, all chickens are brown.

False Dichotomy

• Simplifying a complex problem into a either/or dichotomy. • In false dichotomy, the arguer sets up the situation so it looks like there are only two choices. The arguer then eliminates one of the choices, so it seems that we are left with only one option: the one the arguer wanted us to pick in the first place. • They can be well intentioned strategies to get things accomplished - parents "eat your broccoli or NO desert • Everyone who isn't pro-life believes that we should murder babies. Fact.

Generic fallacy - the Hitler fallacy

• The arguer suggests a claim should be accepted OR rejected because of it's identification with a particular individual or group. • Hitler was a vegetarian. Therefore, vegetarianism is wrong. • Also known as "guilt by association" • The Nazis were conservationists. Therefore, conservationism is wrong.

Single cause

• When an arguer attributes only ONE cause to complex problem • Jon and Shelly got a divorce because Jon refused to make the bed • Banning guns stops school shootings

Fake News (2)

•2016 was peak False News - more stories created and increased exposure •Headlines and stores become part of a person's bank of knowledge, distorts decision making process and leads to flawed assumptions

Harms

•A problem or flaw in the present system. •This is usually what is motivating the advocate to seek change •The chart analyzes some potential problems/harms with fast food

Equal Ground

•A specific argumentative claim that can be debated by both sides •The proposition should ALWAYS have the advocate supporting change in the status quo

The classic rhetoric example of deductive reasoning

•All men are mortal. (major premise) •Socrates is a man. (minor premise) •Therefore, Socrates is mortal. (conclusion) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- •Major Premise - asserts a general position •Minor Premise - connects a specific or case to that generalization •Conclusion - can be generated from the two premises

Syllogism - Validity / soundness

•An argument is valid if its structure conforms to the rules of formal logic. •An argument is sound if it is valid, and its premises are true. •Thus validity is a prerequisite for soundness, but an argument does not need be sound to be valid. - If sound, then valid too - If valid, not necessarily sound

Argument by Causal Correlation

•Analyzes relationships between occurrences to establish connections between situations, cases, or events and generates conclusions based on those relationships and connections •Yeah, so there is a CAUSE and EFFECT relationship •The talking point - violent behavior in society is linked to violent video games •"It hurt the last time I touched the hot part of the stove. It would probably hurt again. "

Rebuttal

•Are there any reasons the claim might not be true •Rebuttals are counter-arguments to the claim

Fauxtography

•Visual content that conveys a misleading or false sense of the events depicted •Technology allows for realistic edits that can change the visual representation •2006 Lebanon War photos changed color •Photos can be used in different events - a picture of one event can be used for another

Logical Reasoning

•Argumentation involves and relies on logical REASONING •Reasoning is the act of thinking about something in a logical or sensible way. •When we reason, we make INFERENCES based on information we have about the situation •We take new information, compare it to what we already knew and then come to a certain conclusion •The new and old pieces of information are commonly known as PREMISES. •Premises are factual evidence that is consistent with our experience and guides our development of inferences in the process of logical reasoning

Ad Populum

•Attempting to prove the claim correct by arguing the most people agree with the claim. • Two Forms: 1.) Snob Appeal - appeal is made to the authority of select few 2.) Bandwagon - all the cool kids are doing it

Argument by Causal Generalization

•Begins with a general principle and reasons from that a truth about a particular case •College students use social media. Kirsten is in college, they must have a twitter account •Charlie is carrying an umbrella, he must be expecting rain

Abductive Reasoning

•Charles Sanders Peirce has drew on Aristotle scholarship and proposed that the traditional methods of reasoning - deductive and inductive - should be accompanied with abductive reasoning •This form of reasoning begins with an incomplete set of observations and proceeds to the LIKELIEST POSSIBLE explanation for the set •In interactions with others, we are left to make decisions with only the information we have on hand or take our best guess •"Around the 4th of July, you hear loud popping signs that also frighten your dog; you assume it is fireworks."

Toulmin Components

•Claim - The statement the arguer wants accepted. •Grounds - The support for the claim •Warrant - The connection between the claim and the grounds •Backing - The reason to support the warrant. •Modality - How sure the arguer is about the claim. •Rebuttal - Reasons the claim might not be true.

Syllogism

•Classic type of DEDUCTIVE reasoning that includes a major premise, minor premise and conclusion. Three types of syllogisms - categorical, conditional and disjunctive •Syllogisms test the VALIDITY of an argument NOT the TRUTH •Is this argument VALID - All math teachers are over 7 feet tall. - Mr. Rogers is a math teacher. -Therefore, Mr. Rogers is over 7 feet tall.

Coherence

•Does the story hang together? Is it probable to the hearer? •Can be assessed by comparing a story to others with a similar theme •Ultimate test: Can we count on characters to act in a reliable manner?

Fidelity

•Does the story ring true and humane? •Does the story square with the hearer's experiences? •Story has fidelity when it provides good reasons to guide future actions

Categorical Syllogism

•Draws a conclusion about all things that belong to a given category •It holds UNIVERSAL premises - If all A is B, and if all C is A, then all C is B. - major premise: All Christians believe Jesus is the son of God. - minor premise: Johnny is a Christian. - conclusion: Johnny believes Jesus is the son of God. •Major Premise explains what the arguer believes is true •Minor Premise - arguer would explain why a specific thing exist within that category •Conclusion - this generates a guaranteed conclusion

Argument by sign

•Draws a general conclusion by observing the presence of certain attributes or characteristics •Connects a phenomena with conditions that exist •"where there is smoke there is fire" •"the parking lot at the stadium is full, the is probably a baseball game today"

Argument by analogy

•Draws conclusions after comparing cases and identifying similarities, even when the cases might not appear to be so similar - Attempts to support what was true in one situation will be true in another •"National Single Payer health insurance has worked in Canada so it will work in the United States" •Literal Analogy - makes a direct comparison between cars within the same category - "You are just like your mother, always getting into car accidents" •Figurative Analogy - compares two things that normally would not be the same, or do not exist within the same category -"Going to college is like learning to walk, you have to take one step at a time"

Disjunctive Syllogism

•Either/or syllogism •The Major premise presents alternatives, usually indicated by an "either-or" or "neither—nor" - Major premise: Either Melissa will get coffee, or she'll make it to class on time. - Minor premise: Melissa didn't get coffee. - Conclusion: Therefore, Melissa made it to class on time. •Logically valid if the major premise includes all the possible alternatives and the alternative are mutually exclusive

Fisher challenges the status quo

•For 2000 years rhetoric had been analyzed in terms of reason, pathos, logos and how well people were making their argument. •Rhetoric was all about persuasion and how to convince others. •Humans are rational creatures •1984 Fisher proposed that offering good reasons has more to do with telling a compelling story than it does with evidence or constructing argument. •Humans are narrative beings and that storytelling epitomizes our human nature. •All forms of human communication are narrative, meaning that we communicate in order to tell stories, or give report of an event or events.

Grounds

•Grounds provides support for a claim •This is also referred to as Data, Reasons and even Proof •It consist of statistics, quotations, reports, findings, physical evidence, or various forms of reasoning

Significance

•How LARGE / BIG / IMPORTANT the harm is •Quantitative significance - harm affects a large number of people •Qualitative significance - those who are affected are impacted profoundly

Modality

•How confident are you in your claim? •Modality is the level of certainty an arguer has in the claim •Examples include: definitely, most, probably, possibly, likely, usually, sometimes and maybe.

Equal Ground examples

•Incorrect: Resolved: Parents should not abuse their children. •Correct: Resolved: State governments should take additional action to protect children in potentially abusive environments.

Components of sponsored content

•Matches characteristics and form of the publisher's original content •Serves useful and entertaining view to help sponsor brand

Rational Paradigm vs. Narrative Paradigm

•People are essentially rational. •We make decisions on the basis of arguments. •The type of speaking situation (legal, scientific, legislative) determines the course of our argument. •Rationality is determined by how much we know and how well we argue. •The world is a set of logical puzzles that we can solve through rational analysis. •People are essentially storytellers. •We make decisions on the basis of good reasons, which vary depending on the communication situation, media, and genre (philosophical, technical, rhetorical, or artistic). •History, biography, culture and character determine what we consider good reasons. •Narrative rationality is determined by the coherence and fidelity of our stories. •The world is a set of stories from which we choose, and thus constantly re-create, our lives.

Narrative Rationality

•People are storytelling monsters •According to Fisher, not all stories are good. •Stories need to meet the twin tests of narrative coherence and narrative fidelity. •Together they are measures of a story's truthfulness and humanity.

Valid Arguments

•Proposition - Should the Minimum Wage Increase •Premise - High Minimum wage leads to high unemployment rate •Conclusion - Minimum wage should not go up •To be valid the CONCLUSION must be true and the PREMISE must support the conclusion

Debatable

•Propositions should be able to be debated effectively on both sides •Three Guidelines: - Cannot be obviously true or false - Must be some way to come to an approximate conclusion of truth - Shouldn't be a truism •Incorrect: Global climate change is not real •Correct: The United States federal government should implement a carbon tax.

John Dewey's Reflective Thinking Model has five steps

•Recognition of a felt difficulty •Location and definition of the difficulty •Suggestions of a possible solution •Development by reasoning of the bearings of the suggestion •Further observation and experiment leading to acceptance or rejection

Argument by example

•States that because one or more cases within a particular category possess a certain quality or feature that all cases within that category will also possess that quality or feature •All dogs I have ever seen can bark; therefore, all dogs can bark •My friend Scott's baby cries a lot. Babies must cry a lot

Two Types of Inherency

•Structural - when a problem is found in a formal or informal system (institutions, laws/rules, policies/practices, and or customs) •Attitudinal - when the problem results from beliefs, ideas, or values (articulated opinions, feelings, or emotional reactions)

Types of deductive reasoning

•Syllogism •Categorical Syllogism •Conditional Syllogism •Disjunctive Syllogism •Argument by sign •Causal Generalization

Warrant

•The inferential leap or bridge connecting the grounds to the claim •The warrant is often implied - the arguer believes that it is obvious or given

Limited in scope

•The proposition acts as the subject, it is imperative to write a limited proposition that correctly identifies the subject and sides of the dispute •Two guidelines: - Should account only for the present situation - Avoid being "double-barreled" •Incorrect: Euthanasia is illegal and ethical. •Correct: Euthanasia should be legalized in the United States.

FIVE CRITERIA in writing a proposition

•The proposition should present a claim that provides relatively equal ground •The proposition should be debatable •The proposition should be phrased clearly and simply •The proposition should be limited in scope - not double-barreled •The proposition should be interesting

Inherency

•The societal structure or attitude responsible for causing the present system or state of belief/behavior to exist •Inherency signals that current policy is not adequate to address a problem with the present system.

Alt Facts are wrong

•They are an outright lie - date wrong, numbers made up •Use a small piece of truth to justify a conclusion that is should not justify •They are a MISNOMER

The Stock issues

•They assist in analyzing an argument •Resolved: the United States federal government should fund additional programs to provide body cameras for all law enforcement officers working in the United States.

Inductive Reasoning

•This is the opposite of deductive reasoning, it moves from specific cases to more general conclusions •It cannot produce the levels of certainty demanded of deductive reasoning •Inductive relies more on PROBABILITY not certainty - it is used in everyday life because few problems we encounter have certain or necessarily "correct" solutions • "All the cows I have ever seen gave milk, therefore, all cows gave give milk" •Being able to make inferences based on probabilities helps us discover new information or new patterns that deductive reasoning forecloses

Stock Issues (Based on John Dewey's Reflective Thinking Model) (There are FIVE stock issues)

•This model helps establish that there is STRONG reason to change from the STATUS QUO and support a NEW ACTION

Clear and simple

•To make it clear: - Use precise language - Include direction of change - Avoid extra language - To help effectiveness an agent is sometime included •Incorrect: Marijuana should be legalized because it has a veritable plethora of benefits to patients suffering with health issues. •Correct: The medicinal use of marijuana should be legalized.

Competing hypothesis

•Used when an arguer considers two or more different theories to explain an event or occurrence and selects one as more plausible than the others •Choosing not any hypothesis but selecting one as more plausible than others •You are waiting for a pizza delivery and hear the doorbell ring......

Inference of the best Explanation

•Used when an arguer observes a set of facts and infers an effect from a particular cause •Group of friends deciding on a place to eat and 6 of the 8 select the same place......

Empirical argument

•Uses an empirical claim as an explanation created over time that provides the best justification for the set of facts •"the earth's core is made of iron" •While other explanations exist for what the earth's core is made of, the best educated guess is iron