Three Methods for Building Arguments

Classical, Toulmin and Rogerian

The Classical Model Introduction

Lead-in Overview of the situation Background

Position statement (thesis) Appeals (ethos, pathos, logos) and evidence

Appeals: to ethics, character, authority (ethos); to emotions (pathos); to reason logos)

Evidence: citing of statistics, results, findings, examples, laws, relevant passages from authoritative texts

The Classical Model

Refutation (often presented simultaneously with the evidence)

Conclusion (peroration) Highlights of key points presented (if

appropriate) Recommendations (if appropriate) Illuminating restatement of thesis

The Toulmin Model

Make a claim, your statement of belief, what you plan to prove. Claims supported by facts Claims supported by expert opinion Claims supported by values

The Toulmin Model

Provide Data to support your claim – the evidence, the information Facts or statistics Personal experience Authority Values

The Toulmin Model

Warrant The warrant is the logical relationship

between your claim and your data; it may be implied or it may be explicit

(similar to major premise in an enthymeme);

it is the assumption that connects the claim and the data.

The Rogerian Model

Introduce the issue and restate the opposing position to show you understand it.

Show in which contexts and under what conditions the opposing position may be valid. State it so that it is acceptable to the opposition.

The Rogerian Model Write a clear transition that moves the

reader from the position you have just explained to the position that you favor and will now defend.

State your own position, and describe the context in which it is valid.

Show how the opposing position would be strengthened if it added elements of your position, and try to reconcile the two positions.

Rogerian Argument – 6 Parts1. Introduction – State

problem

2. Summary of Opposing Views – State the views of people with whom you disagree

3. Statement of understanding – situations in which these views are valid (concession)

4. Statement of your position

5. Statement of Contexts – situations in which you hope your own views would be honored.

6. Statement of Benefits – Appeal to the self-interest of people who do not already share your views but are beginning to respect them because of your position.

Summary and Comparison of the Classical, Toulmin, and Rogerian Models

Classical Model Based on philosophical ideals of sound thinking,

incorporating the Aristotelian appeals of ethos (ethical principles, recognized authority, and shared values), pathos (stirring of emotions), and logos (dialectical reasoning)

Follows a predetermined arrangement of elements: An introduction that states the problem and the thesis, presentation of the evidence, refutation of challenging views, and a conclusion

Summary and Comparison of the Classical, Toulmin, and Rogerian Models

Toulmin Model Based on the pragmatics of the judicial system

rather than the ideals of philosophical thinking Approaches an argument in terms of its claims

(which are presented more as hypotheses being opened to challenge than as truths to be proven), its data, and its underlying warrants, and backing justifying those warrants, that make the data trustworthy

Recognizes the "real-world" complexities of an argument; gives special emphasis to refutation

Summary and Comparison of the Classical, Toulmin, and Rogerian Models

Rogerian Model Based on humanistic values that take into

account the importance of social coop eration in argument (that is, finding common ground is valued over "beating the opposition")

(1) Emphasizes points of agreement over points of disagreement, and (2) treats the issue as a common problem for both the writer and the audience

Urges arguers to cultivate multiple perspectives toward issues