The Art Of Argumentation And Debate By Francisco Africa Pdf

The art of debate. Download the art of debate or read online books in PDF, EPUB, Tuebl, and Mobi Format. Click Download or Read Online button to get the art of debate book now. This site is like a library, Use search box in the widget to get ebook that you want. Students will participate in a debate in which they must research, explain, support, and defend a position. The issue may be contemporary, historical, or literary. This assignment also requires students to listen to, analyze, evaluate, and respond to claims and counterclaims made by the opposing side.

One of the major modes of discourse, argumentation can be applied to virtually all assignments involving critical reasoning no matter thesubject or discipline. As it involves a higher level of reasoning thanassociated with descriptive writing, or narrative writing, or expositorywriting per se, it is crucial for the successful university-level student tounderstand and master the principles, indeed the concepts that drive thecritical thinking skills associated with argumentative writing.

The argumentative essay shares many characteristics with theexpository essay. The argument also consists of an introduction, body andconclusion. It also is built around a major premise (in this instance, calledthe Proposition rather than the Thesis Statement). Additionally, there isa definite pattern of organization used in developing the argument. Butbefore delving more deeply into this, let us go to the fundamentals.

First, one must be familiar with the terminology. In this instance, theterm argument refers to 'a reasoned attempt to convince the audience toaccept a particular point of view about a debatable topic.' Looking moreclosely at this definition, we observe that the argument is not irrational;it does not depend strictly on passion or emotion. Rather, argumentationrepresents a 'reasoned attempt,' that is, an effort based on carefulthinking and planning where the appeal is to the mind, the intellect of theaudience at hand. Why? The answer to this is that one wants to 'convincethe audience to accept a particular point of view.'

The key concept here is 'to convince the audience,' that is, you mustmake them believe your position, accept your logic and evidence. Not onlydo you want them to accept the evidence, but you want that audience toaccept 'a particular point of view' -- that point of view, or perspective, isyours. It is your position, your proposition. Understand that all too oftenthe audience may be intrigued by the evidence presented, but that intriguealone is not enough to convince them of the validity or authority of yourposition in the matter.

You want the audience to accept your point of view about the topicwhether it is gun control, safe sex, or stiffer prison sentences forcriminal offenders no matter what age. Finally, there must be 'a debatabletopic' present for a true argument to develop.

What is debatable? One cannot, for example, debate whether or not the LosAngeles Dodgers won the 1988 World Series or that Dodger pitcher OrelHershiser won the Most Valuable Player Award for that particular WorldSeries. One cannot debate the fact that the Chicago Bulls won threeconsecutive National Basketball Association (NBA) championships from1991-1993 or that Evander Holyfield, while losing his heavyweightchampion of the world title to Riddick Bowe in 1992 was able to regainthe title 11 months later in 1993 at Caesar's Palace in Las Vegas.

Those are indisputable facts. One cannot debate the fact that Rev. JesseLouis Jackson lost the 1988 bid for the Democratic Party's Presidentialnomination to Michael Dukakis. That also is fact.

One can debate, however, what the concept of 'Freedom' means to thoseBlack South Africans living under apartheid. One can certainly debatewhether or not high school administrators should ban the wearing ofbaseball caps by students to school as was the case in the San FernandoValley during the 1988 school year in an effort to nip gang violence in thebud as being effective or over-reaching boundaries. Again, the keyprinciple here is that the topic must be one which has at least two sides-- Pro (those in favor of the proposition under discussion) and Con (thosewho are against the Proposition as stated).

Now that we understand what the term argument refers to, we move to thefact that every argument must have a Proposition -- this is the majorpremise of the argument and classically will have at least three (3)major claims on which it is to be built.

The negative image of the African American male can be directly traced tothe historic stereotyping of a racist white mentality evidenced in motionpictures, in literature and in popular American folklore.

Note here that the major premise is that the negative image of the AfricanAmerican male can be directly traced to the historic stereotyping of aracist white mentality. But to develop this proposition, the person mustshow through evidence (1) negative images in motion pictures, (2) negative images in American literature, and (3) negative images of African American males in popular American folklore. What you want to keep in mind,irrespective of the position you might be advancing, is to formulate a clearly stated proposition. There must be no ambiguity about your proposition.You also want to indicate within that proposition how you intend to support or develop it. And finally, you want to do so within one complete sentence that carries a subject and a verb.

To support your proposition, one must present evidence. There are two (2)types of evidence used in argumentation : fact(s) and opinion(s). Factsconsist of items that can be verified or proven. There are at least four (4)categories of facts:

1. By Scientific Measurement -- one measures the extent of an earthquake not by how 'it felt,' but rather how it measured on the Richter Scale. In track and field, one commonly finds the Accutron used to time running events in thousandths of a second and the more accurate metric system used in field events such as the long jump or javelin throw;
2. By the Way Nature Works -- we know that the sun rises in the eastand sets in the west; that water flows downhill, not uphill; that cloudformations indicate specific weather patterns;
3. By Observation -- in courts of law, this would consist of eyewitnesstestimony. In research, this might consist of a longitudinal study of aphenomenom carried out over a period of 3-5 years involving several hundreds or thousands of cases looking for and recording similarities and differences; and
4. By Statistics -- to note that for the year 1988, crimes of violence inthe United States increased 9.2 percent from 1987 -- from 112,598 reported cases to 122,957 (a gain of 10,359 crimes). While this is a hypothetical example, one sees the approach used.

The second type of evidence that can be utilized in an argument isopinion. In this instance, we are not talking about your personal opinion(the audience already knows your position in the matter!). Nor are wetalking about the way you friend might feel about the issue. That wouldsurely be inadmissable in a court of law. Rather, the type of opinion wedeal with here is expert opinion -- the opinions expressed by an established authority in the field. If the topic is child abuse patterns, then onemay wish to cite a child psychologist who has published on the subject orthe head of a group like Parents Anonymous that has dedicated itself toreducing and/or eliminating child abuse. The opinion(s) cited must becredible.

It is in presenting your evidence that you are, in fact, developing the Bodyof your argument. Keep in mind that in putting forth your Proposition, youdo so in your introductory paragraphs. In developing that Introduction, youwant to get the attention of the audience -- so again, make effective useof the various opening strategies. That evidence, be it fact or opinion,must be present in each of the three planks you put forth to develop andsupport your proposition. You want to make ample use of examples andillustrations along the way, bringing your proposition to life before theaudience, painting word-pictures so that they can see, hear and feel whatyou are advancing to them. You want to convince, not merely inform!

One area often overlooked by those engaged in argumentation, even themore practised, consists of fallacies. A fallacy is best described asillogical reasoning. There are many reasons why this can occur, but in thissection we will single out some of the more important fallacies in hopesthat you will memorize what they are, avoid them in your arguments, andbe able to spot them in the arguments presented by others.

Hasty generalization occurs when you come to a conclusion based ontoo few examples or insufficient data. You might call this 'jumping to conclusions.' By the same token, when taken to the extreme we find that thehasty generalization becomes stereotyping when the actions or traits ofa few are generalized to take in an entire group. Stereotyping can be mean,even vicious. Think of various ethnic stereotypes associated with AfricanAmericans, Asians, Hispanics and Jews.

Begging the Question takes place when you assume as a basic premisesomething that needs to be proven, for example:

1. Inner city schools are inferior to suburban schools.
2. Black colleges are inferior to major state-run universities.
3. The Black Athlete is naturally superior to others.

Evading the Question happens when you move from the real issue andbegin discussing something else. Imagine that the District Attorney in astreetgang homicide case implicates the single parent mother as a defendant as well for failing to know the whereabouts of her son. Or, assertingthat racism in America is no longer a problem with the gains made byAfrican Americans in electoral politics when the issue is the chronic,longtime double-digit unemployment of adult African American males.This type of fallacy will also involve name calling as when you accuseyour opponent of being a wife beater or alcoholic rather than sticking withthe issues. Avoid this. It distracts from your argument and is dishonest.

Finally, there is argumentum ad hominem. This occurs when you directyour argument to the prejudices and instincts of the crowd, of the mob,rather than dealing with the real issue(s). For example, in speaking to agroup of welfare recipients about their tenant rights, you base your argument on the indignities they may have suffered rather than educating themto the problem(s) at hand and what they can do about these.

As you can see, to properly develop an argument calls for time, it calls forresearch, it calls for careful thinking and planning. It also makes certaindemands on you relative to ethics -- that is, you want to always be truthful when addressing the issues, you want to avoid deceit or the appearanceof deception, yours is the burden of maintaining credibility at all times.This is not easy but as you go along, one gains experience and confidence.

All too often do we fall in love with our point of view to the extent thatwe forget our own humanity -- that is, all humans will err. No one canmake a claim to absolute truth on an issue. One must always contend withthe shadow of a doubt. So long as this is true, then you must be consciousof the fact that your opponent may have very valid objections to your proposition. You should try to anticipate, to think of the possible objectionsthat can be made against your argument. Not only that, but those good practicioners of the art will incorporate those objections into theirargument and answer them along the way. This is very impressive. Not onlyhave you, so to speak, stolen some of your opponent's thunder, but you havealso made a very positive impression on your audience/your reader. Forthat audience is now saying to itself, 'Wow, this person has really donehis/her homework!'

The incorporation of these possible objections can occur all along the de-velopment of your argument. They can appear in each and every one of yoursupport planks to your proposition and can then be reiterated at the summary. And it is in the Summary, which is the term used to refer to the conclusion of the argumentative essay, that one wraps everything up in convincing the reader(s) of your point of view.

Nowhere is it more true than with the argumentative essay that you wantto close strongly! The fact is that you not only want the audience to hearyou; you also want them to believe you and, where needed, take action onwhat they have heard. To that end, the argumentative essay will certainlydraw from the eight different strategies that exist to conclude. You maywish to use a combination of these strategies as you make your presentation of proof. With the thought in mind that this paper carries ampleevidence, make certain to observe the guidelines for documentation. Forthose in the social sciences, there are both APA and ASA guidelines thatdo exist and can be studied. The same applies for those in the humanitieswith the Modern Language Association.

In this presentation, we have examined some of the basic principles thatsurround the argumentative mode of discourse. For those concerned witharguing as a social process, then concern must certainly be paid to certaincommunication rules as you are not verbally assaulting someone butrather, as noted earlier, making a rational appeal to the audience to accepta particular point of view based upon a claim supported by evidence. ThoseSpeech Communication scholars will point out that there are four socialconventions which govern any argument. As Douglas Ehninger points out,'That is, when you decide to argue with another person, you are making,generally, commitments to four standards of judgment:'

1. Convention of Bilaterality: Argument is explicitly bilateral: itrequires at least two people or two competing messages. The arguer,implicitly or explicitly, is saying that he or she is presenting a messagethat can be examined by others. A spokesperson for the National UrbanLeague, for example, assumes that designation and puts forth that organization's proposed solution(s) to certain social problems that America isfaced with in oppostion to solutions offered by others. In doing so, theNational Urban League specifically calls for counterargument so that amiddle ground may be reached.
2. Convention of Self-Risk: In argument, there is always the risk ofbeing proven wrong. For example, when you argue that a federal publicschool system is preferable to a state- or local-based public schoolsystem, you invite the possibility that your opponent will convince youthat local or neighborhood-controlled schools present fewer bureaucraticproblems and more benefits than does federal control. Keep in mind thatthe public has been invited to carefully evaluate both arguments, that thepublic eye can and will expose your weakenesses as well as those of youropponent.
3. The Fairness Doctrine: Our system of government, from thecommunity level up to the Congress itself, is based upon the 'fairnessdoctrine.' This, in itself, presents the following concept: the idea thatdebate (argument) ought to be as extended and as complete as possible inorder to guaranteee that all viewpoints are aired, considered, anddefended. In my classroom when students debate, equal time is given toboth sides even if one side chooses not to use all the time allotted, orfails to use all the available time. This is different, however, from howthat time is used -- that is, the effectiveness with which a party is ableto utilize the time it is given.
4. Commitment to Rationality: When you argue or debate, acommitment is made to proceed with logic. When you make an assertion, you are saying, 'This is what I believe and these are my reasons for thatbelief.' As a debater, your commitment is to giving evidence, examples,data in support of your assertion -- reasons that you believe fully supportyour claim and should be accepted by the audience or the doubtful. For example, when you argue that handguns should be banned by law, someoneelse has the right to say 'No' (the convention of bilaterality) and the rightto put forth a contrary (i.e., 'Con') proposition (the fairness doctrine). Furthermore, all parties to the argument -- the doubtful, the audience, theperson or parties you are debating with -- have the right to ask, 'Why doyou believe that?' (the convention of rationality). Argument, accordingly,is a rational form of communication in the sense that all debaters believethey have good reasons for the acceptance of their assertions. They are, infact, obligated to provide those reasons; they cannot get away withsaying,'Oh, I don't know -- I just feel that it's true. That's the way it is.You know what I mean.' If the evidence presented is relevant to theassertion being made and if they are acceptable to the audience hearingthe assertion put forth, then the debater will have met that commitmentto rationality.

With this in mind, the person about to engage in debate will always takecare to assess not only the assertion being made, but the audience towhom that claim is being presented. You may have done exhaustiveresearch on a proposition. You may have thought your argument out, havewritten a good opening and closed with a logical conclusion. But if youhave failed to take into account the nature of the audience listening toyour assertion, then there is a great likelihood that your argument willfall upon deaf ears.

Take, for instance, the person whose argument is that predominantly blackinner-city schools are inferior to predominantly white suburban schools.That individual has built this argument by pointing out the problems ofhigh absenteeism rates, high drop-out rates, problems with drugtrafficking on and near the campus, little or no parental involvement in the parent-teacher associations, lax discipline in the classrooms,and poor student performance on standardized tests. At the same time,this arguer has failed to take into account that those listening to this argument live in the inner city, have brothers and sisters, perhaps older relatives who attended the very schools being disparaged or, in their eyes,'put down' yet one more time. It is on factors such as this that argumentsare won and lost, where the arguer has failed to take into account thehuman dimension of the problem -- the people you are addressing withouttaking into account their own emotions about the issue under discussion.

The same holds true for writing an argumentative essay. One becomes impressed not only by the breadth of the research or the writer's command ofthe facts involved, but even moreso by the logic combined with compassionand insight that the arguer demonstrates. Those who would frame an argumentwithout taking into account the human element, who would plungeheadlong into the debate without taking time to stop and ask the question,'Who is my audience and how do they feel about this? How have or willthey be affected by what I have to say?' run the great risk not only of falling short in their argument, but alienating the audience at the same time.Where there is alienation, communication cannot take place. Always keepthis in mind as you develop assertions and present reasons for your beliefs: that people and not walls are taking in your message.

There are four modes of discourse: narration, description, exposition, andargumentation. Of the four, argumentation is unquestionably the primalform of communication as it involves the fine art of persuasion as well.The argumentative essay may also be referred to as the Assertion-with-Evidence essay. The person is making an assertion, a statement that says,'This is so,' which he or she then begins to prove through evidence. Thatassertion is also known as the proposition (i.e., the main idea of an argu-mentative essay). This proposition should have at least three patternsevident within it by which the arguer will develop the argument. Argumentitself may be simply defined as 'a reasoned attempt to convince theaudience to accept a particular point of view about a debateable subject ortopic.'

The evidence one uses in any argument may be divided into fact andexpert opinion. The evidence can and should take the forms of examples,details, illustrations, statistics. When developing an argumentative essay,one has to always beware of fallacies or 'illogical reasoning.' While thereare many types of fallacies that can and do exist in rhetoric, six (6) basicones have been presented here for your review and thinking -- hastygeneralizations, stereotyping, begging the question, name calling, evadingthe question, and argumentum ad hominem. In addition, the goodargumentative essay will always try to take into account what theopposition or contrary position might have to say and include or addressthat within the paper.

Equally important to remember is that argument is a social process andfor those who engage in it, there is a commitment ot specific communica-tion rules: (1) convention of bilaterality; (2) convention of self-risk; (3) the fairness doctrine; and (4) the commitment to rationality. In realizing that argumentation is a social process, the arguer is reminded to neverforget the human factor -- that the audience listening does have anemotional stake in the subject under debate or dispute. Those who fail totake this into account, who treat the audience (i.e., the reader or readers,listeners) like walls rather than human beings will fail in the effort toconvince that group to accept your assertion no matter how ell-organized,no matter how well-developed or articulated.

I remember one time, resting the rifle on her shoulder for a shot at between 75 and a 100 yards.I could shoot better when I was younger though, prairie dog shoots requiree a tripod for me.As far as the Marlin, IMHO, they are probably the most accurate moderately priced semi out of the box that you are going to find.

1. Before reading this presentation, how would you have defined an argument? Differentiate between your earlier definition of an argument and the one that emerges from this article.
2. Develop an argumentative paragraph (either pro or con) on the subject, 'Should Students Be Responsible for Their Learning?' In a separate paragraph, explain why you chose the particular evidence you did. What would be the primary objection that someone taking an oppostion position to you might make, and why? Be specific.
3. In identifying the six types of fallacies that most often occur in argumentative writing, provide your own definition and example or illustration for each.
4. With respect to the social conventions implicit to argumentation -- bilaterality, self-risk, fairness, and rationality -- apply these to yourself in a self-examination of the way you have attempted argumentation and argumentative writing prior to now. What do you learn from this self- assessment?

Key Concepts

1. Proposition
2. Fact(s)
3. Opinion
4. Fallacy
5. Argument
6. Rationality
7. Social Convention(s)
8. Premise
9. Breadth
10. Credible

One of the major modes of discourse, argumentation can be applied to virtually all assignments involving critical reasoning no matter thesubject or discipline. As it involves a higher level of reasoning thanassociated with descriptive writing, or narrative writing, or expositorywriting per se, it is crucial for the successful university-level student tounderstand and master the principles, indeed the concepts that drive thecritical thinking skills associated with argumentative writing.

The argumentative essay shares many characteristics with theexpository essay. The argument also consists of an introduction, body andconclusion. It also is built around a major premise (in this instance, calledthe Proposition rather than the Thesis Statement). Additionally, there isa definite pattern of organization used in developing the argument. Butbefore delving more deeply into this, let us go to the fundamentals.

First, one must be familiar with the terminology. In this instance, theterm argument refers to 'a reasoned attempt to convince the audience toaccept a particular point of view about a debatable topic.' Looking moreclosely at this definition, we observe that the argument is not irrational;it does not depend strictly on passion or emotion. Rather, argumentationrepresents a 'reasoned attempt,' that is, an effort based on carefulthinking and planning where the appeal is to the mind, the intellect of theaudience at hand. Why? The answer to this is that one wants to 'convincethe audience to accept a particular point of view.'

The key concept here is 'to convince the audience,' that is, you mustmake them believe your position, accept your logic and evidence. Not onlydo you want them to accept the evidence, but you want that audience toaccept 'a particular point of view' -- that point of view, or perspective, isyours. It is your position, your proposition. Understand that all too oftenthe audience may be intrigued by the evidence presented, but that intriguealone is not enough to convince them of the validity or authority of yourposition in the matter.

You want the audience to accept your point of view about the topicwhether it is gun control, safe sex, or stiffer prison sentences forcriminal offenders no matter what age. Finally, there must be 'a debatabletopic' present for a true argument to develop.

What is debatable? One cannot, for example, debate whether or not the LosAngeles Dodgers won the 1988 World Series or that Dodger pitcher OrelHershiser won the Most Valuable Player Award for that particular WorldSeries. One cannot debate the fact that the Chicago Bulls won threeconsecutive National Basketball Association (NBA) championships from1991-1993 or that Evander Holyfield, while losing his heavyweightchampion of the world title to Riddick Bowe in 1992 was able to regainthe title 11 months later in 1993 at Caesar's Palace in Las Vegas.

Those are indisputable facts. One cannot debate the fact that Rev. JesseLouis Jackson lost the 1988 bid for the Democratic Party's Presidentialnomination to Michael Dukakis. That also is fact.

One can debate, however, what the concept of 'Freedom' means to thoseBlack South Africans living under apartheid. One can certainly debatewhether or not high school administrators should ban the wearing ofbaseball caps by students to school as was the case in the San FernandoValley during the 1988 school year in an effort to nip gang violence in thebud as being effective or over-reaching boundaries. Again, the keyprinciple here is that the topic must be one which has at least two sides-- Pro (those in favor of the proposition under discussion) and Con (thosewho are against the Proposition as stated).

Now that we understand what the term argument refers to, we move to thefact that every argument must have a Proposition -- this is the majorpremise of the argument and classically will have at least three (3)major claims on which it is to be built.

The negative image of the African American male can be directly traced tothe historic stereotyping of a racist white mentality evidenced in motionpictures, in literature and in popular American folklore.

Note here that the major premise is that the negative image of the AfricanAmerican male can be directly traced to the historic stereotyping of aracist white mentality. But to develop this proposition, the person mustshow through evidence (1) negative images in motion pictures, (2) negative images in American literature, and (3) negative images of African American males in popular American folklore. What you want to keep in mind,irrespective of the position you might be advancing, is to formulate a clearly stated proposition. There must be no ambiguity about your proposition.You also want to indicate within that proposition how you intend to support or develop it. And finally, you want to do so within one complete sentence that carries a subject and a verb.

To support your proposition, one must present evidence. There are two (2)types of evidence used in argumentation : fact(s) and opinion(s). Factsconsist of items that can be verified or proven. There are at least four (4)categories of facts:

1. By Scientific Measurement -- one measures the extent of an earthquake not by how 'it felt,' but rather how it measured on the Richter Scale. In track and field, one commonly finds the Accutron used to time running events in thousandths of a second and the more accurate metric system used in field events such as the long jump or javelin throw;
2. By the Way Nature Works -- we know that the sun rises in the eastand sets in the west; that water flows downhill, not uphill; that cloudformations indicate specific weather patterns;
3. By Observation -- in courts of law, this would consist of eyewitnesstestimony. In research, this might consist of a longitudinal study of aphenomenom carried out over a period of 3-5 years involving several hundreds or thousands of cases looking for and recording similarities and differences; and
4. By Statistics -- to note that for the year 1988, crimes of violence inthe United States increased 9.2 percent from 1987 -- from 112,598 reported cases to 122,957 (a gain of 10,359 crimes). While this is a hypothetical example, one sees the approach used.

The second type of evidence that can be utilized in an argument isopinion. In this instance, we are not talking about your personal opinion(the audience already knows your position in the matter!). Nor are wetalking about the way you friend might feel about the issue. That wouldsurely be inadmissable in a court of law. Rather, the type of opinion wedeal with here is expert opinion -- the opinions expressed by an established authority in the field. If the topic is child abuse patterns, then onemay wish to cite a child psychologist who has published on the subject orthe head of a group like Parents Anonymous that has dedicated itself toreducing and/or eliminating child abuse. The opinion(s) cited must becredible.

It is in presenting your evidence that you are, in fact, developing the Bodyof your argument. Keep in mind that in putting forth your Proposition, youdo so in your introductory paragraphs. In developing that Introduction, youwant to get the attention of the audience -- so again, make effective useof the various opening strategies. That evidence, be it fact or opinion,must be present in each of the three planks you put forth to develop andsupport your proposition. You want to make ample use of examples andillustrations along the way, bringing your proposition to life before theaudience, painting word-pictures so that they can see, hear and feel whatyou are advancing to them. You want to convince, not merely inform!

One area often overlooked by those engaged in argumentation, even themore practised, consists of fallacies. A fallacy is best described asillogical reasoning. There are many reasons why this can occur, but in thissection we will single out some of the more important fallacies in hopesthat you will memorize what they are, avoid them in your arguments, andbe able to spot them in the arguments presented by others.

Hasty generalization occurs when you come to a conclusion based ontoo few examples or insufficient data. You might call this 'jumping to conclusions.' By the same token, when taken to the extreme we find that thehasty generalization becomes stereotyping when the actions or traits ofa few are generalized to take in an entire group. Stereotyping can be mean,even vicious. Think of various ethnic stereotypes associated with AfricanAmericans, Asians, Hispanics and Jews.

Begging the Question takes place when you assume as a basic premisesomething that needs to be proven, for example:

1. Inner city schools are inferior to suburban schools.
2. Black colleges are inferior to major state-run universities.
3. The Black Athlete is naturally superior to others.

Evading the Question happens when you move from the real issue andbegin discussing something else. Imagine that the District Attorney in astreetgang homicide case implicates the single parent mother as a defendant as well for failing to know the whereabouts of her son. Or, assertingthat racism in America is no longer a problem with the gains made byAfrican Americans in electoral politics when the issue is the chronic,longtime double-digit unemployment of adult African American males.This type of fallacy will also involve name calling as when you accuseyour opponent of being a wife beater or alcoholic rather than sticking withthe issues. Avoid this. It distracts from your argument and is dishonest.

Finally, there is argumentum ad hominem. This occurs when you directyour argument to the prejudices and instincts of the crowd, of the mob,rather than dealing with the real issue(s). For example, in speaking to agroup of welfare recipients about their tenant rights, you base your argument on the indignities they may have suffered rather than educating themto the problem(s) at hand and what they can do about these.

As you can see, to properly develop an argument calls for time, it calls forresearch, it calls for careful thinking and planning. It also makes certaindemands on you relative to ethics -- that is, you want to always be truthful when addressing the issues, you want to avoid deceit or the appearanceof deception, yours is the burden of maintaining credibility at all times.This is not easy but as you go along, one gains experience and confidence.

All too often do we fall in love with our point of view to the extent thatwe forget our own humanity -- that is, all humans will err. No one canmake a claim to absolute truth on an issue. One must always contend withthe shadow of a doubt. So long as this is true, then you must be consciousof the fact that your opponent may have very valid objections to your proposition. You should try to anticipate, to think of the possible objectionsthat can be made against your argument. Not only that, but those good practicioners of the art will incorporate those objections into theirargument and answer them along the way. This is very impressive. Not onlyhave you, so to speak, stolen some of your opponent's thunder, but you havealso made a very positive impression on your audience/your reader. Forthat audience is now saying to itself, 'Wow, this person has really donehis/her homework!'

The incorporation of these possible objections can occur all along the de-velopment of your argument. They can appear in each and every one of yoursupport planks to your proposition and can then be reiterated at the summary. And it is in the Summary, which is the term used to refer to the conclusion of the argumentative essay, that one wraps everything up in convincing the reader(s) of your point of view.

Nowhere is it more true than with the argumentative essay that you wantto close strongly! The fact is that you not only want the audience to hearyou; you also want them to believe you and, where needed, take action onwhat they have heard. To that end, the argumentative essay will certainlydraw from the eight different strategies that exist to conclude. You maywish to use a combination of these strategies as you make your presentation of proof. With the thought in mind that this paper carries ampleevidence, make certain to observe the guidelines for documentation. Forthose in the social sciences, there are both APA and ASA guidelines thatdo exist and can be studied. The same applies for those in the humanitieswith the Modern Language Association.

In this presentation, we have examined some of the basic principles thatsurround the argumentative mode of discourse. For those concerned witharguing as a social process, then concern must certainly be paid to certaincommunication rules as you are not verbally assaulting someone butrather, as noted earlier, making a rational appeal to the audience to accepta particular point of view based upon a claim supported by evidence. ThoseSpeech Communication scholars will point out that there are four socialconventions which govern any argument. As Douglas Ehninger points out,'That is, when you decide to argue with another person, you are making,generally, commitments to four standards of judgment:'

1. Convention of Bilaterality: Argument is explicitly bilateral: itrequires at least two people or two competing messages. The arguer,implicitly or explicitly, is saying that he or she is presenting a messagethat can be examined by others. A spokesperson for the National UrbanLeague, for example, assumes that designation and puts forth that organization's proposed solution(s) to certain social problems that America isfaced with in oppostion to solutions offered by others. In doing so, theNational Urban League specifically calls for counterargument so that amiddle ground may be reached.
2. Convention of Self-Risk: In argument, there is always the risk ofbeing proven wrong. For example, when you argue that a federal publicschool system is preferable to a state- or local-based public schoolsystem, you invite the possibility that your opponent will convince youthat local or neighborhood-controlled schools present fewer bureaucraticproblems and more benefits than does federal control. Keep in mind thatthe public has been invited to carefully evaluate both arguments, that thepublic eye can and will expose your weakenesses as well as those of youropponent.
3. The Fairness Doctrine: Our system of government, from thecommunity level up to the Congress itself, is based upon the 'fairnessdoctrine.' This, in itself, presents the following concept: the idea thatdebate (argument) ought to be as extended and as complete as possible inorder to guaranteee that all viewpoints are aired, considered, anddefended. In my classroom when students debate, equal time is given toboth sides even if one side chooses not to use all the time allotted, orfails to use all the available time. This is different, however, from howthat time is used -- that is, the effectiveness with which a party is ableto utilize the time it is given.
4. Commitment to Rationality: When you argue or debate, acommitment is made to proceed with logic. When you make an assertion, you are saying, 'This is what I believe and these are my reasons for thatbelief.' As a debater, your commitment is to giving evidence, examples,data in support of your assertion -- reasons that you believe fully supportyour claim and should be accepted by the audience or the doubtful. For example, when you argue that handguns should be banned by law, someoneelse has the right to say 'No' (the convention of bilaterality) and the rightto put forth a contrary (i.e., 'Con') proposition (the fairness doctrine). Furthermore, all parties to the argument -- the doubtful, the audience, theperson or parties you are debating with -- have the right to ask, 'Why doyou believe that?' (the convention of rationality). Argument, accordingly,is a rational form of communication in the sense that all debaters believethey have good reasons for the acceptance of their assertions. They are, infact, obligated to provide those reasons; they cannot get away withsaying,'Oh, I don't know -- I just feel that it's true. That's the way it is.You know what I mean.' If the evidence presented is relevant to theassertion being made and if they are acceptable to the audience hearingthe assertion put forth, then the debater will have met that commitmentto rationality.

With this in mind, the person about to engage in debate will always takecare to assess not only the assertion being made, but the audience towhom that claim is being presented. You may have done exhaustiveresearch on a proposition. You may have thought your argument out, havewritten a good opening and closed with a logical conclusion. But if youhave failed to take into account the nature of the audience listening toyour assertion, then there is a great likelihood that your argument willfall upon deaf ears.

Take, for instance, the person whose argument is that predominantly blackinner-city schools are inferior to predominantly white suburban schools.That individual has built this argument by pointing out the problems ofhigh absenteeism rates, high drop-out rates, problems with drugtrafficking on and near the campus, little or no parental involvement in the parent-teacher associations, lax discipline in the classrooms,and poor student performance on standardized tests. At the same time,this arguer has failed to take into account that those listening to this argument live in the inner city, have brothers and sisters, perhaps older relatives who attended the very schools being disparaged or, in their eyes,'put down' yet one more time. It is on factors such as this that argumentsare won and lost, where the arguer has failed to take into account thehuman dimension of the problem -- the people you are addressing withouttaking into account their own emotions about the issue under discussion.

The same holds true for writing an argumentative essay. One becomes impressed not only by the breadth of the research or the writer's command ofthe facts involved, but even moreso by the logic combined with compassionand insight that the arguer demonstrates. Those who would frame an argumentwithout taking into account the human element, who would plungeheadlong into the debate without taking time to stop and ask the question,'Who is my audience and how do they feel about this? How have or willthey be affected by what I have to say?' run the great risk not only of falling short in their argument, but alienating the audience at the same time.Where there is alienation, communication cannot take place. Always keepthis in mind as you develop assertions and present reasons for your beliefs: that people and not walls are taking in your message.

There are four modes of discourse: narration, description, exposition, andargumentation. Of the four, argumentation is unquestionably the primalform of communication as it involves the fine art of persuasion as well.The argumentative essay may also be referred to as the Assertion-with-Evidence essay. The person is making an assertion, a statement that says,'This is so,' which he or she then begins to prove through evidence. Thatassertion is also known as the proposition (i.e., the main idea of an argu-mentative essay). This proposition should have at least three patternsevident within it by which the arguer will develop the argument. Argumentitself may be simply defined as 'a reasoned attempt to convince theaudience to accept a particular point of view about a debateable subject ortopic.'

The evidence one uses in any argument may be divided into fact andexpert opinion. The evidence can and should take the forms of examples,details, illustrations, statistics. When developing an argumentative essay,one has to always beware of fallacies or 'illogical reasoning.' While thereare many types of fallacies that can and do exist in rhetoric, six (6) basicones have been presented here for your review and thinking -- hastygeneralizations, stereotyping, begging the question, name calling, evadingthe question, and argumentum ad hominem. In addition, the goodargumentative essay will always try to take into account what theopposition or contrary position might have to say and include or addressthat within the paper.

Equally important to remember is that argument is a social process andfor those who engage in it, there is a commitment ot specific communica-tion rules: (1) convention of bilaterality; (2) convention of self-risk; (3) the fairness doctrine; and (4) the commitment to rationality. In realizing that argumentation is a social process, the arguer is reminded to neverforget the human factor -- that the audience listening does have anemotional stake in the subject under debate or dispute. Those who fail totake this into account, who treat the audience (i.e., the reader or readers,listeners) like walls rather than human beings will fail in the effort toconvince that group to accept your assertion no matter how ell-organized,no matter how well-developed or articulated.

1. Before reading this presentation, how would you have defined an argument? Differentiate between your earlier definition of an argument and the one that emerges from this article.
2. Develop an argumentative paragraph (either pro or con) on the subject, 'Should Students Be Responsible for Their Learning?' In a separate paragraph, explain why you chose the particular evidence you did. What would be the primary objection that someone taking an oppostion position to you might make, and why? Be specific.
3. In identifying the six types of fallacies that most often occur in argumentative writing, provide your own definition and example or illustration for each.
4. With respect to the social conventions implicit to argumentation -- bilaterality, self-risk, fairness, and rationality -- apply these to yourself in a self-examination of the way you have attempted argumentation and argumentative writing prior to now. What do you learn from this self- assessment?

Key Concepts

1. Proposition
2. Fact(s)
3. Opinion
4. Fallacy
5. Argument
6. Rationality
7. Social Convention(s)
8. Premise
9. Breadth
10. Credible