{"id":122,"date":"2017-09-04T06:29:59","date_gmt":"2017-09-04T06:29:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/americanboard.org\/Subjects\/english\/?page_id=122"},"modified":"2017-09-26T14:12:05","modified_gmt":"2017-09-26T14:12:05","slug":"the-basics-of-argumentation","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/americanboard.org\/Subjects\/english\/the-basics-of-argumentation\/","title":{"rendered":"The Basics of Argumentation"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\u2b05 Previous Lesson<\/a>\u00a0Workshop Index<\/a>\u00a0Next Lesson \u27a1<\/a><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

The Basics of Argumentation<\/h1>\n

Objective<\/h4>\n

In this lesson, you will learn how to identify the different parts of an argument and become familiar with the rules and formats of different types of debate.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The ability to formulate, recognize, and criticize arguments is crucial to successful reading, writing, and speaking. Rational discourse and education are founded on the idea that people can use evidence and logic to persuade others to change their minds and adopt new ideas.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

What Is an Argument?<\/h3>\n

An argument<\/a> is group of statements, one of which is claimed to derive or follow from one or more other statements.<\/p>\n

The following statement reflects one example of a basic argument:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cWe should go to the store because we are out of milk.\u201d <\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

There are three main parts of an argument: the premise, <\/i><\/b>the conclusion, <\/b><\/i> and the warrant.<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n

Oftentimes, the warrant of an argument is left unstated because it is obvious and uncontroversial. Were the warrant in the argument above to be stated explicitly, the argument would read something like this:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cWe should go to the store because we are out of milk, we need more milk, and we can get milk at the store.\u201d <\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The fact that most warrants are unstated makes it more difficult to identify than the other two parts of an argument. Though the warrant is innocuous here, identifying and articulating warrants are the key to recognizing faulty and fallacious arguments.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Identifying and articulating an argument\u2019s warrant is like building a bridge between the premises and conclusion.<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s look for warrants in another argument.<\/p>\n

\n

Question<\/h4>\n
\n

John Lennon was the most talented member of the Beatles because he wrote most of their songs. <\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Which of the following is an accurate description of this argument\u2019s warrant?<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. John Lennon was the most talented member of the Beatles.<\/li>\n
  2. The Beatles are one of the best bands of all time.<\/li>\n
  3. Writing a large number of songs is a reliable indicator of talent.<\/li>\n
  4. John Lennon wrote most of the Beatles\u2019 songs.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n

    Reveal Answer <\/a><\/p>\n

    \n

     <\/p>\n

    The answer is C. That statement explicitly connects the idea in the premise\u2014\u201cwrote most of their songs\u201d\u2014to the idea in the conclusion\u2014\u201cwas the most talented.\u201d Choice A is the argument\u2019s conclusion, and Choice D is the reason offered in support of the conclusion. Choice B is simply an irrelevant statement.<\/p>\n

    Note also that, for the purposes of identifying the parts of an argument, the truthfulness of the statements is irrelevant. The premise in the above argument would still be a premise (albeit a bad one) if Paul McCartney wrote most of the Beatles\u2019 songs.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n

    <\/p>\n

    \n

    How Do You Identify the Different Parts of an Argument?<\/h3>\n

    Most arguments take one of two structures. Either the conclusion comes first, and the premises follow, or the conclusion is the final statement and the premises lead up to it. It is less common for a conclusion to appear sandwiched between premises, though it is not unheard of.<\/p>\n

    As a result, distinguishing between the parts of an argument requires an understanding of the logical relationship between them. What proposition is the speaker or writer trying to advance as true? How do other statements offer support for that proposition?<\/p>\n

    One way to hone in on that logical relationship is to ask two questions:<\/p>\n