/
Toulmin Examples Claims are debatable or controversial statements/assertions you hope Toulmin Examples Claims are debatable or controversial statements/assertions you hope

Toulmin Examples Claims are debatable or controversial statements/assertions you hope - PowerPoint Presentation

yoshiko-marsland
yoshiko-marsland . @yoshiko-marsland
Follow
430 views
Uploaded On 2018-11-05

Toulmin Examples Claims are debatable or controversial statements/assertions you hope - PPT Presentation

Evidence and Reasons Claim A claim answers the question what should we do ID: 715659

claim warrant examples appeal warrant claim appeal examples smokers reasons support smoking federal gov

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Toulmin Examples Claims are debatable or..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Toulmin ExamplesSlide2

Claims are debatable or controversial statements/assertions you hope to prove

Evidence and Reasons

ClaimSlide3

A claim answers the question “what should we do?”

􀂃A surprisingly large number of arguments don’t have claims. “The President is dumb” “Our taxes are too high” or, “The war is immoral” are all examples of arguments without claims. Slide4

Warrant answers the question: How do I get from the claim to the data?

Reasons

So

Claim

Since

WarrantSlide5

Warrants are the unstated (or stated) assumptions or agreements you can rely on your audience making in order to believe your reasons.

Warrants support reasons

They can be oversimplified to ___________ is good OR ___________ is bad.Slide6

Example:

Vending machines should be removed from campus because they

promote unhealthy eating habits

and

cause classroom distractions.Warrant #1= Unhealthy eating habits hurt studentsWarrant #2= Classroom distractions are undesirableSlide7

Examples

ADOT needs to widen the I-17 now because traffic congestion has worsened and fatal accidents have increased.

Warrant #1= ?

Traffic congestion is bad

Warrant #2= ?People dying is worse

Everyone should be able to express their religious beliefs because it is their right to do so.Warrant #1= ? if it is a right, we should be able to do it (also-religious expression is a right)Slide8

Examples

The NBA should accept players out of high school because players like Lebron James and Kobe Bryant are beneficial to teams.

Warrant #1= ?

Talented players who benefit teams are important enough to society that we can overlook the age/education factorSlide9

Warrants tell you what arguments you have to make and at what level you have to make them

The mushroom is poisonous

So do not eat it!

Since eating poisonous things is dangerousSlide10

More examples

Smoking causes serious diseases in smokers and endangers non-smokers as well.

So the federal government should ban smoking.

Since the Constitution was established to “promote the general welfare,” and citizens are thus entitled to protection from the harmful acts of others.Slide11

More examples

I have been drinking since age 14 without a problems.

So the legal age for drinking should be lowered.

What works for me should work for everyone else.Slide12

Backing

Additional support or proof you might need to prove your reasons are good if your warrant is shaky or arguable

Example: Violent music lyrics cause violent behavior because they cause people to think in violent ways.

Warrant= ?

Does the warrant need backing?Could the claim be qualified?How?Slide13

More examples

Fill in the

Reasons

and Identify the

Backing

NASA should launch a human expedition to Mars because Americans need a unifying national goal.

What unifies the nation should be a national priority.

On a personal level, Americans want to be a part of something bigger than themselves. (Emotional appeal)

In a country as diverse as the US, common purposes and values help make a nation stronger. (Ethical appeal)

In the past, enterprises such as westward expansion, WWII, and the Apollo moon program enabled many (though not at all) Americans to work toward common goals. (Logical appeal as evidence)Slide14

Fill in the blanks

(Emotional appeal)

(Ethical appeal)

(Logical appeal as evidence)

If the federal gov’t can spend huge amounts of $ on the military, it can afford to spend moderate amounts on arts programs.

A country that can fund expensive programs can also afford less expensive programs.Slide15

Fill in the blanks

In most cases, people who don’t go to college earn less money than those who do.

(Emotional appeal)

(Ethical appeal)

(Logical appeal as evidence)

Vanessa went to NAU and makes $50,000/year, while Jonny went to work right after graduating from SDOHS and makes $20,000/year.Slide16

Using Qualifiers

Few

It is possible

Rarely

It seemsSomeIt may be

More or lessIn some casesManyRoutinely

MostOne may argueOftenPerhapsPossiblyUnder these conditions

For the most partIf it were soSlide17

Conditions of Rebuttal

Potential objections to the argument/claim.

Claim- The federal gov’t should support the arts because it also supports the military.

Warrant- If the federal gov’t can support the military, it can also support other programs.

Rebuttal-The federal gov’t is constitutionally obligated to fund the military. Support for public TV or a local dance troop is hardly in the same league.Slide18

Concession

Acknowledging a part of the opposing argument that can not be refuted

Rebuttal follows the concession but uses it to build upon or further one’s OWN claim.

Example: It is true that SB1070 is a deterrent to illegal immigrants who might cross through Arizona.

However, the additional manpower needed to enforce the law will allow other crimes to go unpursued.Slide19

Outline of the Toulmin Model

Claim- The federal gov’t should ban smoking.

Qualifier- The ban would be limited to public spaces.

Reason- Smoking causes disease in smokers. Non-smokers are endangered by second hand smoke.

Warrant- The Constitution promises “to promote the general welfare.” And citizens are entitled to protection from harmful actions by others.

Backing- The US is based on a political system that is suppose to serve the basic needs of its people, including their health.Evidence- 102,002 deaths attributed to second hand smoke in 2010. Lawsuit won against Camel Cigarettes, citing the need for smoking related health costs.Slide20

Authority- ?

Surgeon general. Doctor, scientist

Concession- ?

The ban applies to public places; smokers can smoke in private or designated areas.

Rebuttal- ?Smokers have rights too. Smoking laws should be left to the individual states.Slide21

Now read an example passage

Read “Testing Speech Codes”

Annotate/identify the Toulmin terms in the passage