|
Toulmin Model of ArgumentStephen Toulmin, originally a British logician, is now a professor at USC. He became frustrated with the inability of formal logic to explain everyday arguments, which prompted him to develop his own model of practical reasoning.The first triad of his model consists of three basic elements:
A claim is the point an arguer is trying to make. The claim is the proposition or assertion an arguer wants another to accept. The claim answers the question, "So what is your point?" example: "You should send a birthday card to Mimi, because she sent you one on your birthday." example: "I drove last time, so this time it is your turn to drive." fact: claims which focus on empirically verifiable phenomenaGrounds refers to the proof or evidence an arguer offers. Grounds answers the questions, "What is your proof?" or "How come?" or "Why?" Grounds can consist of statistics, quotations, reports, findings, physical evidence, or various forms of reasoning. example: "It looks like rain. The barometer is falling." grounds can be based on: The warrant is the inferential leap that connects the claim with the grounds.evidence: facts, statistics, reports, or physical proof, The warrant is typically implicit (unstated) and requires the listener to recognize the underlying reasoning that makes sense of the claim in light of the grounds. example: "That dog is probably friendly. It is a Golden Retriever." warrant: generalization; most or all Golden Retrievers are friendly warrants can be based on: ethos: source credibility, authority The second triad of the Toulmin model involves three addditional elements:note: these categories aren't mutually exclusive, there is considerable overlap among the three Backing provides additional justification for the warrant. Backing usually consists of evidence to support the type of reasoning employed by the warrant.The qualifier states the degree of force or probability to be attached to the claim. The qualifier states how sure the arguer is about his/her claimThe rebuttal acknowledges exceptions or limitations to the argument. The rebuttal admits to those circumstances or situations where the argument would not hold. |