1

ARGUMENTS AND MODELS

USED TO ORGANIZE
IN-CLASS DEBATES
JMAñavesa/10/21

At the end of this Module, you will be able to:

1. identify and evaluate parts of an argument using Toulmin Argument Model;
2. identify argument fallacies; and
3. write an argumentative essay.

The Toulmin Argument Model was developed by philosopher Stephen E. Toulmin. The
method is an argumentation style that breaks arguments into six parts: claim, grounds, warrant,
qualifier, rebuttal, and backing.
In this lesson, we are going to evaluate the parts of an argument using Toulmin Argument
Model. Try to note every detail as we go along with the lesson.

Lesson 1: Toulmin Argument Model

TASK 1: You are going to read different texts that follow Toulmin Method. Read and understand
the texts and take note of the FORMAT because these examples will serve as your roadmap as you
go along with the activities.
 2

Example 1.

Because teenage pregnancy rates are rising, strict dress codes need to be enforced in all schools,
since children should not be having children because they cannot care for their youngsters unless
they come from wealthy families.

Example 2.

Due to the public’s lack of empathy for other living creatures, animal abuse should require
mandatory jail time since animal abusers frequently escalate their levels of violence until humans
become their prey on account of their predisposition for violence unless their violent tendencies
are harshly punished.

Example 3.

Because American standardized test scores have universally declined, the traditional system of
education needs to be drastically reconfigured since the future of our country depends on the
wisdom of our children and their desire to maintain a consistent level of excellence unless we want
our future to seem as dismal as our current situation. While some would argue that reconfiguring
our educational system would be too time-consuming, most experts agree that immediate steps
must be taken to ensure that America does not fall behind its global partners in the area of
education.

With the reading activity, let us have a deeper understanding of Lesson 1 on the Toulmin
Argument Model.

Toulmin Argument Method is a style of argumentation that breaks arguments into six
components: claim, grounds/supports, warrant, qualifier, rebuttal, and backing.

Stephen Toulmin, an English philosopher, and logician, identified these elements of a

persuasive argument. These give useful categories by which an argument may be analyzed.
 3

Terms:

A claim is an assertion that authors would like to prove to their audience. It is, in other words, the
main argument.

The grounds/support of an argument is the evidence and facts that help support the claim.

Finally, the warrant, either implied or explicitly stated, is the assumption shared by the speaker
and audience (links the claim to the support/grounds.)

The backing is additional data used to support the warrant. In many cases, the warrant is implied,
and therefore the backing provides support for the warrant by giving a specific example that
justifies the warrant.

The qualifier restricts the claim and limits its range, setting boundaries for the warrant's strength
(usually, probably, in most cases, most likely, frequently, under these circumstances, never, in
certain situations, etc.)

The rebuttal is an acknowledgment of another valid view of the situation. It voices objections that
could refute/rebut the claim.

To help you remember, familiarize this little formula: “Because (support), therefore, (claim),
since (warrant), on account of, or because of (backing), unless (reservation).”

Take note of the examples that you read earlier:

Example 1.

Because teenage pregnancy rates are rising (support), therefore, strict dress codes need to be
enforced in all schools (claim), since children should not be having children (warrant) because
they are unable to care for their youngsters (backing) unless they, themselves, come from wealthy
families (reservation).
 4

Example 2.

Due to the public’s lack of empathy for other living creatures (support), animal abuse should
require mandatory jail time (claim) since animal abusers frequently (qualifier) escalate their
levels of violence until humans become their prey (warrant) on account of their predisposition for
violence (backing) unless their violent tendencies are harshly punished (reservation).

Example 3.

Because American standardized test scores have universally declined (support), the traditional
system of education needs to be drastically reconfigured (claim) since the future of our country
depends on the wisdom of our children (warrant) and their desire to maintain a consistent level of
excellence (backing) unless we want our future to seem as dismal as our current situation
(reservation). While some would argue that reconfiguring our educational system would be too
time-consuming (rebuttal), most experts agree that immediate steps must be taken to ensure that
America does not fall behind its global partners in the area of education.

Let’s Discover more!

The Toulmin Model Although Aristotle and Rogers, centuries and worlds apart, have made
significant contributions to rhetorical theory, we decided to organize this text around an
argumentative model that we believe is more helpful in reading and systematically writing
arguments: the Toulmin Model. The late Stephen Toulmin provided the vocabulary about
argumentation that gives this book its structure. Toulmin's model, proposed in 1958 in The Uses
of Argument, was designed to analyze courtroom arguments. After his model had been introduced
to rhetoricians by Wayne Brockriede and Douglas Ehninger, he discussed its rhetorical
implications in Introduction to Reasoning (1979). Of the six key terms in Toulmin's model, we
draw heavily on three: claim, support, and assumption (also sometimes called a warrant). The
Toulmin model addresses all three legs of the communication triangle, connecting writer, subject,
and audience.
 5

The Claim The claim (also called a proposition) answers the question, "What are you trying
to prove?" It will generally appear as the thesis statement of an essay, although it may not be stated
directly in some arguments. There are three principal kinds of claims: claims of fact, of value, and
policy. Claims assert that a condition has existed, exists, or will exist and are based on facts or data
that the audience will accept as being objectively verifiable.

 The diagnosis of autism is now far more common than it was twenty years ago.
 Fast foods are contributing significantly to today’s epidemic of childhood obesity.
 Climate change will affect the coastlines of all continents.

Data must support all these claims. Although the last example is an inference or an educated
guess about the future, a reader will probably find the prediction credible if the data seem
authoritative. Claims of value attempt to prove that some things are more or less desirable than
others. They express approval or disapproval of standards of taste and morality. Advertisements
and reviews of cultural events are one common source of value claims, but such claims emerge
whenever people argue about good or bad, beautiful or ugly.
 6

Policy claims call for analysis of both fact and value.

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
 14

TASK 2: Analyze the following article using Toulmin’s three key terms: claim, support, and
assumption. Use the above Robert J. Samuelson essay as a model. Then answer the questions that
appear at the end.

Embryo Selection May Help Prevent Some Inherited Disorders

by STEVEN REINBERG

When a 27-year-old woman wanted to have a baby using in vitro fertilization, there was one major
problem — she was a carrier of Gerstmann-Straussler Sheinker syndrome. This rare, degenerative
neurological condition is usually diagnosed in mid-life and is always fatal. Not wanting to risk
having her child become a victim of the syndrome, she turned to a technique that tests embryos for
certain mutated genes and only uses those embryos that don’t carry the mutation for implantation.

“This disease was found in five generations in this family, and we stopped passing these bad genes
to the next generation,” said study co-author Svetlana Rechitsky, laboratory director at the
Reproductive Genetics Institute in Chicago. According to Dr. Ilan Tur-Kaspa, lead researcher and
president and medical director of the Institute for Human Reproduction in Chicago, “These new
cases can be prevented now by pre-implantation genetic diagnosis.”

Although this is the first report on using this method for a so-called prion disorder, it could also
help prevent diseases like Huntington’s and familial forms of Alzheimer’s disease, he said. Prion
diseases involve abnormal folding of the prion protein in the brain. The most commonly known
one, which is not inherited, is bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or “mad cow” disease.

The report was published online on February 3 in the journal JAMA Neurology. The process
started with a simple in vitro fertilization procedure. Eggs from the woman were removed and
fertilized. Then came the tricky part. Doctors removed single cells from the embryos, and because
 15

a single gene mutation causes the syndrome, they looked at DNA to find embryos that didn't have
the mutated gene.

"We can identify which embryo is healthy and which embryo has the bad gene," Rechitsky
explained.

Two of the disease-free embryos were implanted, and the woman had twins delivered by cesarean
section a little more than 33 weeks later. The remaining normal embryos were frozen for later use.
At 27 months, the researchers reported that the twins had normal communication, social, and
emotional skills. One expert noted the importance of the finding.

"Most of the genetic disorders identified by pre-implantation genetic diagnosis are caused by either
single genes — such as cystic fibrosis, Huntington's disease, sickle cell anemia, Down syndrome,
Trisomy 18 (Edwards syndrome) and chromosomal translocations — and most have no treatment
or cure," said Christine Metz, director of Maternal-Fetal Medicine Research at the Feinstein
Institute for Medical Research in Manhasset, New York. "Thus, it is important for young parents
to know and understand their risks for inherited diseases before conception." In addition, pre-
implantation genetic diagnosis is beginning to be used to reduce the transmission of mutant cancer
genes, such as the BRCA1/BRCA2 genes, which are tied to breast cancer, and the MLH1, MSH2,
and APC genes that are linked to colon cancer, she said.

"Over several generations, we can hope to improve human health by reducing the transmission of
several hereditary disorders," Metz said. Rechitsky acknowledged that some people have ethical
problems with the potential for this technology to tailor babies to parents' desires. However, in the
25 years they have been doing the procedure, she said it hasn't been a problem.

"We had the first successful pregnancy in 1990," Rechitsky said. "Over the years, we have
performed over 4,000 procedures for single-gene disorders. It has become a more widely accepted
approach to prevent hereditary disease," she explained. As to tailoring babies, "we have never ever
had any requests like this," she said. Moreover, many of the things parents might want to select
for, like intelligence, involve many genes, not just one.

"We don't know even how to approach this," she noted. Dr. Avner Hershlag, chief of the Center
for Human Reproduction at North Shore University Hospital in Manhasset, New York, said, "Like
 16

any sophisticated technique, reproductive technology can be abused. There are ethical issues."
Hershlag noted that "the most ethical approach is that it should be used to identify disease only
and select embryos that are free of disease. I don't want it to ever head into that murky, questionable
line between right and wrong. It is absolutely right to diagnose a disease in an embryo and use
embryos that don't have a disease.

READING AND DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. How does the procedure that Reinberg describes stop the inheritance of diseases?

2. Why might some people find the procedure unethical? What is Dr. Hershlag’s
defense against that charge?

3. Is Reinberg’s claim in the article the same as the claim that Dr. Hershlag is
making?

4. What types of support for his claim does Reinberg offer?

5. What assumption must a reader be willing to accept Reinberg's claim.

TASK 3: Create your own essay using the Toulmin model using the following format below. You
can also check these links so that you will have additional information on the Toulmin Argument
method.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWnEbMZ0IaA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTd1v6iR97s

Support
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
 17

Warrant

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

Backing
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

Qualifier
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

Reservation
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

Rebuttal
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

Claim
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
 18

Lesson 2: Arguments on Rhetorical Fallacies, Language Arguments

One of the most critical components of learning in college is the academic discourse,
which requires argumentation and debate. Argumentation and debate inevitably lend
themselves to flawed reasoning and rhetorical errors. Many of these errors are considered logical
fallacies. Logical fallacies are commonplace in the classroom, in formal televised debates, and
perhaps most rampantly on any number of internet forums. But what is a logical fallacy? And just
as important, how can you avoid making logical fallacies yourself?

TASK 1: The short story below is entitled “Love is a Fallacy," written by Max Shulman. The story
presents different arguments about love. Read along and try to determine the fallacies presented.
Answer also the comprehension check questions as you go along the story.

Love is a Fallacy

by Max Shulman

Cool was I and logical. Keen, calculating, perspicacious, acute, and astute—I was all of
these. My brain was as powerful as a dynamo, precise as a chemist's scales, as penetrating as a
scalpel. And—think of it!—I was only eighteen.

It is not often that one so young has such a giant intellect. Take, for example, Petey
Bellows, my roommate at the university. Same age, same background, but dumb as an ox. A nice
enough fellow, you understand, but nothing upstairs. Emotional type. Unstable. Impressionable.
Worst of all, a faddist. Fads, I submit, are the very negation of reason. To be swept up in every
 19

new craze that comes along, to surrender oneself to idiocy just because everybody else is doing
it—this, to me, is the acme of mindlessness. Not, however, to Petey.

One afternoon, I found Petey lying on his bed, expressing such distress on his face that I
immediately diagnosed appendicitis. "Don't move," I said, "Don't take a laxative. I'll get a doctor."

“Raccoon,” he mumbled thickly.

“Raccoon?” I said, pausing in my flight.

“I want a raccoon coat,” he wailed.

I perceived that his trouble was not physical but mental. "Why do you want a raccoon
coat?"

"I should have known it," he cried, pounding his temples. "I should have known they'd
come back when the Charleston came back. Like a fool, I spent all my money for textbooks, and
now I can't get a raccoon coat."

“Can you mean,” I said incredulously, “that people are actually wearing raccoon coats
again?”

“All the Big Men on Campus are wearing them. Where’ve you been?”

“In the library,” I said, naming a place not frequented by Big Men on Campus.

He leaped from the bed and paced the room. “I’ve got to have a raccoon coat,” he said
passionately. “I’ve got to!”

“Petey, why? Look at it rationally. Raccoon coats are unsanitary. They shed. They smell
bad. They weigh too much. They’re unsightly. They—”

“You don’t understand,” he interrupted impatiently. “It’s the thing to do. Don’t you want
to be in the swim?”

“No,” I said truthfully.

“Well, I do,” he declared. “I’d give anything for a raccoon coat. Anything!”

My brain that precision instrument slipped into high gear. "Anything?" I asked, looking at
him narrowly.

“Anything,” he affirmed in ringing tones.

 20

I stroked my chin thoughtfully. It so happened that I knew where to get my hands on a

raccoon coat. My father had had one in his undergraduate days; it lay now in a trunk in the attic
back home. It also happened that Petey had something I wanted. He didn’t have it exactly, but at
least he had first rights on it. I refer to his girl, Polly Espy. I had long coveted Polly Espy. Let me
emphasize that my desire for this young woman was not emotional in nature. She was, to be
sure, a girl who excited the emotions, but I was not one to let my heart rule my head. I wanted
Polly for a shrewdly calculated, entirely cerebral reason.

I was a freshman in law school. In a few years, I would be out in practice. I was well aware
of the importance of the right kind of wife in furthering a lawyer's career. The successful lawyers
I had observed were, almost without exception, married to beautiful, gracious, intelligent
women. With one omission, Polly fitted these specifications perfectly. Beautiful she was. She was
not yet of pin-up proportions, but I felt that time would supply the lack. She already had the
makings. Gracious she was. By gracious, I mean full of graces. She had an erectness of carriage,
an ease of bearing, a poise that clearly indicated the best of breeding. At the table, her manners
were exquisite. I had seen her at the Kozy Kampus Korner eating the specialty of the house—a
sandwich that contained scraps of pot roast, gravy, chopped nuts, and a dipper of sauerkraut—
without even getting her fingers moist. Intelligent she was not. She veered in the opposite
direction. But I believed that under my guidance, she would smarten up. At any rate, it was worth
a try. It is, after all, easier to make a beautiful dumb girl smart than to make an ugly smart girl
beautiful.

COMPREHENSION CHECK!

1. How would you describe the narrator in the story?

2. How was Petey Bellow described in the story?
3. How about Polly?
4. What was the narrator's main reason for wanting Polly?
 21

“Petey,” I said, “are you in love with Polly Espy?”

“I think she’s a keen kid,” he replied, “but I don’t know if you’d call it love. Why?”

"Do you," I asked, "have any kind of formal arrangement with her? I mean, are you going
steady or anything like that?"

“No. We see each other quite a bit, but we both have other dates. Why?”

“Is there,” I asked, “any other man for whom she has a particular fondness?”

“Not that I know of. Why?”

I nodded with satisfaction. “In other words, if you were out of the picture, the field would
be open. Is that right?”

“I guess so. What are you getting at?”

"Nothing, nothing," I said innocently and took my suitcase out of the closet.

“Where are you going?” asked Petey.

"Home for the weekend." I threw a few things into the bag.

“Listen,” he said, clutching my arm eagerly, “while you’re home, you couldn’t get some
money from your old man, could you, and lend it to me so I can buy a raccoon coat?”

“I may do better than that,” I said with a mysterious wink and closed my bag and left.

"Look," I said to Petey when I got back Monday morning. I threw open the suitcase and
revealed the huge, hairy, gamy object my father wore in his Stutz Bearcat in 1925.

“Holy Toledo!” said Petey reverently. He plunged his hands into the raccoon coat and then
his face. “Holy Toledo!” he repeated fifteen or twenty times.

“Would you like it?” I asked.

“Oh yes!” he cried, clutching the greasy pelt to him. Then a canny look came into his eyes.

“What do you want for it?”

"Your girl," I said, mincing no words.

“Polly?” he said in a horrified whisper. “You want Polly?”

“That’s right.”
 22

He flung the coat from him. “Never,” he said stoutly.

I shrugged. “Okay. If you don’t want to be in the swim, I guess it’s your business.”

I sat down in a chair and pretended to read a book, but out of the corner of my eye, I kept
watching Petey. He was a torn man. First, he looked at the coat with the expression of a waif at
a bakery window. Then he turned away and set his jaw firmly. Then he looked back at the coat,
with even more longing on his face. Then he turned away but with not so much resolution this
time. Back and forth, his head swiveled, desire waxing, resolution waning. Finally, he didn't turn
away at all; he just stood and stared with mad lust at the coat. "It isn't as though I was in love
with Polly," he said thickly. "Or going steady or anything like that."

COMPREHENSION CHECK!

5. If you were Pettey Bellow, what would your decision be?

6. Based on the excerpt above, what can you say about the narrator’s
behavior? What kind of friend was he?
7. Do you agree with his scheme? Why or why not?

“That’s right,” I murmured.

“What’s Polly to me, or me to Polly?”

“Not a thing,” said I.

“It’s just been a casual kick—just a few laughs, that’s all.”

“Try on the coat,” said I. He complied.

The coat bunched high over his ears and dropped all the way down to his shoe tops. He
looked like a mound of dead raccoons. “Fits fine,” he said happily.

I rose from my chair. “Is it a deal?” I asked, extending my hand.

He swallowed. “It’s a deal,” he said and shook my hand.

 23

I had my first date with Polly the following evening. This was like a survey; I wanted to
find out just how much work I had to do to get her mind up to the standard I required. I took her
first to dinner.

“Gee, that was a delish dinner,” she said as we left the restaurant. Then I took her to a
movie. “Gee, that was a marvy movie,” she said as we left the theatre. And then I took her home.
“Gee, I had a sensaysh time,” she said as she bade me good night.

I went back to my room with a heavy heart. I had gravely underestimated the size of my
task. This girl’s lack of information was terrifying. Nor would it be enough merely to supply her
with information. First, she had to be taught to think. This loomed as a project of no small
dimensions, and at first, I was tempted to give her back to Petey. But then I got to thinking about
her abundant physical charms and about the way she entered a room and the way she handled
a knife and fork, and I decided to make an effort. I went about it, as in all things, systematically. I
gave her a course in logic. It happened that I, as a law student, was taking a course in logic myself,
so I had all the facts at my fingertips.

“Poll’,” I said to her when I picked her up on our next date, “tonight we are going over to
the Knoll and talk.”

“Oo, terrif,” she replied. One thing I will say for this girl: you would go far to find another
so agreeable. We went to the Knoll, the campus trysting place, and we sat down under an old
oak, and she looked at me expectantly.

“What are we going to talk about?” she asked.

“Logic.”

She thought this over for a minute and decided she liked it. “Magnif,” she said.

“Logic,” I said, clearing my throat, “is the science of thinking. Before we can think
correctly, we must first learn to recognize the common fallacies of logic. These we will take up
tonight.”

"Wow-dow!" she cried, clapping her hands delightedly. I winced but went bravely on.
"First, let us examine the fallacy called Dicto Simpliciter.”

“By all means,” she urged, batting her lashes eagerly.

“Dicto Simpliciter means an argument based on an unqualified generalization. For

example, exercise is good. Therefore, everybody should exercise."
 24

"I agree," said Polly earnestly. "I mean, exercise is wonderful. I mean it builds the body
and everything."

"Polly," I said gently, "the argument is a fallacy. Exercise is good is an unqualified

generalization. For instance, if you have heart disease, exercise is bad, not good. Many people
are ordered by their doctors not to exercise. You must qualify the generalization. You must say
exercise is usually good, or exercise is good for most people. Otherwise, you have committed a
Dicto Simpliciter. Do you see?”

“No,” she confessed. “But this is marvy. Do more! Do more!”

"It will be better if you stop tugging at my sleeve," I told her, and when she ceased, I
continued. "Next, we take up a fallacy called Hasty Generalization. Listen carefully: You can’t
speak French. Petey Bellows can’t speak French. I must therefore conclude that nobody at the
University of Minnesota can speak French.”

“Really?” said Polly, amazed. “Nobody?”

I hid my exasperation. “Polly, it’s a fallacy. The generalization is reached too hastily. There
are too few instances to support such a conclusion.”

“Know any more fallacies?” she asked breathlessly. “This is more fun than dancing even.”

I fought off a wave of despair. I was getting nowhere with this girl, absolutely nowhere.
Still, I am nothing if not persistent. I continued. “Next comes Post Hoc. Listen to this: Let’s not
take Bill on our picnic. Every time we take him out with us, it rains.”

“I know somebody just like that,” she exclaimed. “A girl back home—Eula Becker, her
name is. It never fails. Every single time we take her on a picnic—”

“Polly,” I said sharply, “it’s a fallacy. Eula Becker doesn’t cause the rain. She has no
connection with the rain. You are guilty of Post Hoc if you blame Eula Becker.”

“I’ll never do it again,” she promised contritely. “Are you mad at me?”

I sighed. “No, Polly, I’m not mad.”

“Then tell me some more fallacies.”

“All right. Let’s try Contradictory Premises.”

 25

"Yes, let's," she chirped, blinking her eyes happily. I frowned but plunged ahead. "Here's
an example of Contradictory Premises: If God can do anything, can He make a stone so heavy that
He won’t be able to lift it?”

“Of course,” she replied promptly.

“But if He can do anything, He can lift the stone,” I pointed out.

"Yeah," she said thoughtfully. "Well, then I guess he can't make the stone."

“But He can do anything,” I reminded her.

She scratched her pretty, empty head. “I’m all confused,” she admitted.

“Of course, you are. Because when the premises of an argument contradict each other,
there can be no argument. If there is an irresistible force, there can be no immovable object. If
there is an immovable object, there can be no irresistible force. Get it?”

“Tell me more of this keen stuff,” she said eagerly.

I consulted my watch. “I think we’d better call it a night. I’ll take you home now, and you
go over all the things you’ve learned. We’ll have another session tomorrow night.”

COMPREHENSION CHECK!

8. Based only on the passage above, do you think Polly will improve under
the narrator's teaching? What makes you think so?

I deposited her at the girls' dormitory, where she assured me that she had had a perfectly
terrify evening, and I went glumly home to my room. Petey lay snoring in his bed; the raccoon
coat huddled like a great hairy beast at his feet. For a moment, I considered waking him and
telling him that he could have his girl back. It seemed clear that my project was doomed to failure.
The girl simply had a logic-proof head. But then I reconsidered. I had wasted one evening; I might
as well waste another. Who knew? Maybe somewhere in the extinct crater of her mind, a few
members still smoldered. Perhaps somehow, I could fan them into flame. Admittedly it was not
a prospect fraught with hope, but I decided to give it one more try.

Seated under the oak the next evening, I said, "Our first fallacy tonight is called Ad
Misericordiam.” She quivered with delight.
 26

“Listen closely,” I said. “A man applies for a job. When the boss asks him what his
qualifications are, he replies that he has a wife and six children at home, the wife is a helpless
cripple, the children have nothing to eat, no clothes to wear, no shoes on their feet, there are no
beds in the house, no coal in the cellar, and winter is coming.”

A tear rolled down each of Polly’s pink cheeks. “Oh, this is awful, awful,” she sobbed.

"Yes, it's awful," I agreed, "but it's no argument. The man never answered the boss's
question about his qualifications. Instead, he appealed to the boss's sympathy. He committed
the fallacy of Ad Misericordiam. Do you understand?”

"Have you got a handkerchief?" she whined. I handed her a handkerchief and tried to
keep them from screaming while she wiped her eyes.

“Next,” I said in a carefully controlled tone, “we will discuss False Analogy. Here is an
example: Students should be allowed to look at their textbooks during examinations. After all,
surgeons have X-rays to guide them during an operation; lawyers have briefs to guide them
during a trial; carpenters have blueprints to guide them when building a house. Why, then,
shouldn't students be allowed to look at their textbooks during an examination?"

“There now,” she said enthusiastically, “is the most marvy idea I’ve heard in years.”

"Polly," I said testily, "the argument is all wrong. Doctors, lawyers, and carpenters aren't
testing how much they have learned, but students are. The situations are altogether different,
and you can't make an analogy between them."

“I still think it’s a good idea,” said Polly.

"Nuts," I muttered. Doggedly I pressed on. "Next, we'll try Hypothesis Contrary to Fact.”

“Sounds yummy,” was Polly’s reaction.

“Listen: If Madame Curie had not happened to leave a photographic plate in a drawer
with a chunk of pitchblende, the world today would not know about radium.”

"True, true," said Polly, nodding her head. "Did you see the movie? Oh, it just knocked me
out. That Walter Pidgeon is so dreamy. I mean, he fractures me."

“If you can forget Mr. Pidgeon for a moment,” I said coldly, “I would like to point out that
statement is a fallacy. Maybe Madame Curie would have discovered radium at some later date.
Maybe somebody else would have discovered it. Maybe any number of things would have
 27

happened. You can’t start with a hypothesis that is not true and then draw any supportable
conclusions from it.”

“They ought to put Walter Pidgeon in more pictures,” said Polly, “I hardly ever see him
anymore.”
One more chance, I decided. But just one more. There is a limit to what flesh and blood
can bear. “The next fallacy is called Poisoning the Well.”
“How cute!” she gurgled.
“Two men are having a debate. The first one gets up and says, ‘My opponent is a notorious
liar. You can’t believe a word that he is going to say.’… Now, Polly, think. Think hard. What’s
wrong?”
I watched her closely as she knit her creamy brow in concentration. Suddenly a glimmer
of intelligence—the first I had seen—came into her eyes. "It's not fair," she said with anger. "It's
not a bit fair. What chance has the second man got if the first man calls him a liar before he even
begins talking?"
"Right!" I cried exultantly. "One hundred percent right. It's not fair. The first man has
poisoned the well before anybody could drink from it. He has hamstrung his opponent before he
could even start… Polly, I'm proud of you."
“Pshaws,” she murmured, blushing with pleasure.
“You see, my dear, these things aren’t so hard. All you have to do is concentrate. Think—
examine—evaluate. Come now, let’s review everything we have learned.”
"Fire away," she said with an airy wave of her hand. Heartened by the knowledge that
Polly was not altogether a cretin, I began a long, patient review of all I had told her. Over and
over and over again, I cited instances, pointed out flaws, kept hammering away without letup. It
was like digging a tunnel. At first, everything was work, sweat, and darkness. I had no idea when
I would reach the light, or even if I would. But I persisted. I pounded and clawed and scraped, and
finally, I was rewarded. I saw a chink of light. And then the chink got more prominent and the sun
came pouring in, and all was bright.
Five grueling nights with this took, but it was worth it. I had made a logician out of Polly;
I had taught her to think. My job was done. She was worthy of me, at last. She was a fit wife for
me, a proper hostess for my many mansions, a suitable mother for my well-heeled children. It
must not be thought that I was without love for this girl—quite the contrary. Just as Pygmalion
loved the perfect woman he had fashioned, so I loved mine. I decided to acquaint her with my
feelings at our very next meeting. The time had come to change our relationship from academic
to romantic.
COMPREHENSION CHECK!

“Polly,” I said when next we sat beneath our oak, “tonight we will not discuss
9. If you were in the narrator's shoes, would you continue to pursue such a
girl like Polly, or would you not? Why?
 28

“Aw, gee,” she said, disappointed.

“My dear,” I said, favoring her with a smile, “we have now spent five evenings together.
We have gotten along splendidly. It is clear that we are well matched.”

“Hasty Generalization,” said Polly brightly.

“I beg your pardon,” said I.

“Hasty Generalization," she repeated. "How can you say that we are well matched based
on only five dates?"

I chuckled with amusement. The dear child had learned her lessons well. “My dear,” I said,
patting her hand in a tolerant manner, “five dates is plenty. After all, you don’t have to eat a
whole cake to know that it’s good.”

“False Analogy,” said Polly promptly. “I’m not a cake. I’m a girl.”

I chuckled with somewhat less amusement. The dear child had learned her lessons
perhaps too well. I decided to change tactics. The best approach was a simple, strong, direct
declaration of love. I paused for a moment while my massive brain chose the proper word. Then
I began: "Polly, I love you. You are the whole world to me, the moon and the stars and the
constellations of outer space. Please, my darling, say that you will go steady with me, for if you
will not, life will be meaningless. I will languish. I will refuse my meals. I will wander the face of
the earth, a shambling, hollow-eyed hulk."

There, I thought, folding my arms, that ought to do it. “Ad Misericordiam,” said Polly.

I ground my teeth. I was not Pygmalion; I was Frankenstein, and my monster had me by
the throat. Frantically, I fought back the tide of panic surging through me; I had to keep cool at
all costs. "Well, Polly," I said, forcing a smile, "you certainly have learned your fallacies."

“You’re darn right,” she said with a vigorous nod.

“And who taught them to you, Polly?”

“You did.”

"That's right. So you do owe me something, don't you, my dear? If I hadn't come along,
you never would have learned about fallacies."
 29

“Hypothesis Contrary to Fact," she said instantly. I dashed sweat from my brow. "Polly," I
croaked, "you mustn't take all these things so literally. I mean, this is just classroom stuff. You
know that the things you learn in school don't have anything to do with life."

“Dicto Simpliciter,” she said, wagging her finger at me playfully. That did it. I leaped to my
feet, bellowing like a bull. “Will you or will you not go steady with me?”

“I will not,” she replied.

“Why not?” I demanded.

“Because this afternoon I promised Petey Bellows that I would go steady with him.”

I reeled back, overcome with the infamy of it after he promised after he made a deal after
he shook my hand! "The rat!" I shrieked, kicking up significant chunks of turf. "You can't go with
him, Polly. He's a liar. He's a cheat. He's a rat."

“Poisoning the Well,” said Polly, “and stop shouting. I think shouting must be a fallacy
too.”

With an immense effort of will, I modulated my voice. "All right," I said. "You're a logician.
Let's look at this thing logically. How could you choose Petey Bellows over me? Look at me—a
brilliant student, a tremendous intellectual, a man with an assured future. Look at Petey—a
knothead, a jitterbug, a guy who'll never know where his next meal is coming from. Can you give
me one logical reason why you should go steady with Petey Bellows?"

“I certainly can,” declared Polly. “He’s got a raccoon coat.”

TASK: Supply the table with the answers asked. All the fallacies mentioned in the story should be
written in the first column, and the second column should have its corresponding examples.
 30

“Love is a Fallacy” by Max Shulman

FALLACIES USED IN THE STORY: Examples (from the story)

 31

A fallacy is logically incorrect reasoning, undermines the logical validity of an argument,

or is recognized as unsound. All forms of human communication can contain fallacies. Because
of their variety, fallacies are challenging to classify. Below are the types of Fallacies.

1. Pathetic Fallacies

Argument to the People (Appeal to Stirring symbols)

Example: Politicians sometimes drape themselves in American flags to convince voters

to vote for them

Appeal to Ignorance (Presenting Evidence the Audience Can’t Examine)- This is not
necessarily ignorance of the audience, just using evidence they have no access to.

Example: A literary critic may discuss the intention or state of mind of James Joyce.

Appeal to Irrational Premises

 Appeal to common practice

 Example: Everyone else is embezzling; why shouldn't we?
 Appeal to traditional wisdom
 Example: We’ve always embezzled.
 Appeal to popularity
 Example: Buy the Toyota Camry because it’s the bestselling car in the
world.

Red Herring (Shifting the Audience’s Attention)

Example: When someone begins an answer to a question with “Let me tell you a story,”
they are often shifting the focus of the question, even if unintentionally.
 32

Provincialism (Known is better than the Unknown)

For example, in the 1960s, American car companies tried to fight off Japanese
manufacturers with ad campaigns claiming "Americans like big cars."

2. Ethical Fallacies

Appeal to False Authority

Example: In the 1970s, a Michigan mortgage company ripped off a bunch of customers.
With no legal grounds for suing the company, the customers sued George Hamilton, the
celebrity spokesperson, for misleading them. They didn't win, and the court established
that companies might not lie, but they may use fallacious arguments in their ads.

Appeal to the Person (Ad Hominem)

Example: In the 1980s, a group of physicists opposing Reagan's SDI ("Star Wars") signed
a lengthy letter to that effect. A pro-SDI group claimed that the anti-crowd was only
opposed because they weren't getting any of the research and development money.
The accusing group was vulnerable to the opposite accusation: they favored it only
because they were getting money for it.

Strawman (Oversimplifying Opponent’s Position)

Example: Politicians do it all the time: “My opponent wants to let murders out of jail
where they’ll be free to kill again.”

3. Logical Fallacies

Begging the Question (Supporting the Claim with a Restatement of the Claim)

Example: Abortion is murder. Since most legal definitions of murder include reference
to a human being, pro-lifers slip their premise, in conclusion, that way.

Complex Question (Asking a Question that Cannot be Answered Harmlessly)

 33

Example: When did you stop beating your wife?

False Dilemma (Either/Or)

Example: When Truman dropped the bombs on Japan, he had convinced himself he was
down to two choices: nuclear strikes or a ground invasion costing the lives of thousands
on both sides. Some historians are questioning whether he may have had other
options.

Equivocation (Using Different Definitions of the Same Word)

Example: Cultural literacy proponents have been known to say things like, "People can't
flourish without being culturally literate." But 'flourish' is never defined, and it is often
used in many ways: financial success, moral integrity, family happiness, etc.

Confusing Correlation with Causation (Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc--After it, therefore
because of it)-Correlation is when two things happen together; causation is when one
actually causes the other.

Example: A couple of prominent examples of the fallacy: "Cramming for a test really
helps. Last week I crammed for a psych test and got an A on it."

"I am allergic to the sound of a lawnmower because every time I mow the lawn, I start
to sneeze."

Slippery Slope- a lot of First Amendment arguments fit here.

Example: "If he's forced to cut his hair, next thing you know, all the kids will be wearing
uniforms and saying 'Heil Principal.'"

Hasty Generalization

 Mistaking the part for the whole

 Example: We should get rid of the NEA because they have sponsored a few
questionable events lately.
 34

 Suppressed evidence
 Example: The NEA director does not mention the few questionable events when he
asks for more money.

Faulty Analogy

Example: This comes from psychologist Carl Rogers: “During the war when a test-tube
solution was found to the problem of synthetic rubber, millions of dollars and an army
of talent was turned loose on the problem of using that finding… But in the social
science realm, if a way is found of facilitating communication and mutual understanding
in small groups, there is no guarantee that the finding will be utilized.”

Non Sequitur

Example: I can’t get a C on this paper because I got A’s in high school.
 35

Supply the diagram below by giving two examples of the subcategories of Pathetic Fallacy,
Ethical Fallacy, and Logical Fallacy.

PATHETIC FALLACY

1.

2. 1.

2.

1.
1. 2.
2.
1.

2.
 36

1.

2. 1.
1.
2.
2.

1.

2.

LOGICAL FALLACY

1.
1.
2.
2.

1.
1.
2.
2.
1.

2.
 37

ETHICAL FALLACY

1.

1. 2.

1. 2.

2.
 38

LESSON 3: Definitional Arguments, Causal Arguments, and

Humorous Arguments

Watch the video about Definitional Arguments, Causal Arguments,

Definitional Arguments https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdnBvWAxWds

Causal Arguments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLMqH_Yn4BY

Definition is a rhetorical style that uses various techniques to impress upon the reader the meaning
of a term, idea, or concept. A definition may be used for an entire essay but is often used as a
rhetorical style within an essay that may mix rhetorical styles. For example, you may need to use
definition to explain a concept before you argue about that concept fully.

Definition Argument
The definition argument focuses on clarifying a definition for a controversial term or concept. In
other words, a definition argument asserts we cannot make explicit assertions or possess a clear
understanding of an issue until we understand exactly what the terms mean.
 39

Definition Structure
Watch the video below to learn more about the structure of a definition argument.

https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-and-critical-thinking/argumentative-purposes/argumentative-
purposes-definition/

Video Transcript:

Definition Structure

Creating a well-developed argumentative structure is similar to putting together a puzzle. Each

piece has specific characteristics and belongs in a particular place to make the whole picture.

Although there may always be variations, a good basic outline for a definition argument might
look like this.

First Piece – In your introduction, which may be more than one paragraph, summarize the
details of the problem. End with a thesis that presents your claim.

Second Piece – Provide detailed definitions of the key term or terms. This may take one or two
paragraphs.

Third Piece – Present detailed support for your claim with a focus on how your claims work
within the definition of the term. You should present at least three key ideas for help, so this
section should be at least three paragraphs long.

Fourth Piece – Address the opposing views. What problems exist with your claim? Be sure to
bring the focus back to your points about the definition of the term.

Fifth Piece – Finally, summarize the main points of your essay and relate your issue to the
bigger picture in your conclusion. Make it clear to your audience that a new-found understanding
of the issue leads to a better understanding and support for your claim.
 40

A humorous argument is an argument that attempts to persuade by invoking feelings of good

humor and laughter. To laugh with someone seems to imply agreement with his position and makes
an agreement with the position easier.

Often this fallacy takes the form of a cleverly worded or humorous slogan. On the other
hand, calling a position "absurd" or "laughable" without actually telling a joke should probably be
considered an Ad Hominem - Abusive fallacy rather than an Appeal to Humor. A good comedian
can sometimes make us laugh at something merely by saying that it is funny. Generally speaking,
declaring that something is funny without actually making fun of it is more abusive than humorous.
Also, be careful not to confuse Appeal to Humor with other fallacies (especially Amphiboly) that
tend to be funny. The fallacy of Appeal to Humor uses humor to persuade. The speaker is aware
of the joke and is inviting the listener to share the joke with him. Other fallacies are funny because
we see through them. In those cases, the speaker is not aware that he is the butt of the joke, and he
is not aware that the listener is laughing at him.

Examples:

"I notice that everyone in favor of abortion has already been born." - Ronald Reagan
1980, in response to a question on his position on abortion during the presidential
debates.

"Keep Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, and Rumsfeld in the office! After all, why change
horsemen in mid-apocalypse?" - found on a website during the 2004 Bush re-
election campaign.

Any stand-up comic will tell you that the secret to humor is: tell the truth. A good comic
tells us things about ourselves that we usually wouldn't want to hear since they are too
embarrassing or sensitive. But by getting us to laugh about ourselves, we learn to recognize our
own defects, and we learn to forgive the foibles of others. We laugh at human foibles because this
allows us to live with them. Humor is the ultimate defense mechanism. Laughter is a natural and
healthy way to respond when we recognize that someone has offered us a bravely-spoken, but
possibly uncomfortable, truth.

The fallacy of Appeal to Humor exploits our natural response to bravely-spoken truth. The
fallacy presumes that any view that can be expressed in a way that elicits laughter must be true.
However, we actually laugh for many reasons. We may laugh at a slogan merely because it is
cleverly worded. We may laugh only because everyone around us is laughing. We laugh at
slapstick humor. An argument mimics our response to bravely-spoken truth when it gets us to
laugh for a reason unrelated to our recognition of reality.
 41

Benefits of humor
Humor has many benefits for communication and persuasion. Here are just a few...

Better communication
Studies by Fabio Sala at the Hay Group have shown that humor (used skillfully):
 Reduces hostility
 Deflects criticism
 Relieves tension
 Improves morale
 Helps communicate difficult messages
Executives ranked as outstanding used humor over twice as often as those ranked average (17.8
times/hr vs. 7.5 times/hr). They used mostly positive or neutral humor and sometimes used
negative humor (for example, a put-down). They also received more significant bonuses.
Although humor may not be a necessary and sufficient factor to gain all these benefits, it is at
least a marker, perhaps, of emotional intelligence.
Research by Clouse and Spurgeon has also shown that a good joke or playful laughter can boost
creativity, initiate conversation and generally build a more trusting atmosphere.
Other research by Bettinghaus and Cody (1994) and Foot (1997) showed that humor:
 Builds rapport and liking of the humorist
 Makes the target person want to listen more
 Relaxes the person, making them more receptive to the message
 Makes the person feel good and hence not think so carefully about the proposition
 Makes the information more memorable
 Distracts the person from thinking about counter-arguments
Getting concessions
Playful joking also increases the likelihood of financial concessions during a negotiation.
Relaxing the other person and building trust makes them see you more as a friend and deserve a
better deal.
Better health
Humor is also good for your health. Although this is not directly related to changing minds,
healthier people are more likely to pay attention and will want to listen to your ideas.
Some of how laughter makes you healthier include:
 It lowers your blood pressure.
 It exercises your muscles, including your abdomen and diaphragm as well as those in
your thorax, neck, shoulders, face, and scalp.
 42

 It strengthens your immune system, decreasing stress hormones and increasing infection-
fighting antibodies.
 It deepens, and so improves your breathing.
Other benefits of humor include:
 It distracts you from negative emotions.
 It changes your perspective, making things less overwhelming.
 It increases your energy.
 It connects you to others (we like happy people).
 It just makes you feel good.

Causal Argument
A causal argument focuses specifically on how something has caused or has led to some
particular problem. A causal view answers a how or why question: How did things get to be the
way they are? Why did something happen?

A causal argument is a vital argument type, as people are often looking for reasons for why
things have happened but may not be sure or have all of the necessary information. In your
causal argument, you get the chance to make these things clear.

Causal Structure
Watch the video below to learn more about the structure of a causal argument.

https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-and-critical-thinking/argumentative-purposes/argumentative-
purposes-causal/

Video Transcript:

Causal Structure

Creating a well-developed argumentative structure is similar to putting together a puzzle. Each

piece has specific characteristics and belongs in a particular place to make the whole picture.
 43

Although there may always be variations, a good basic outline for a causal argument might look
like this.

First Piece – In your introduction, which may be more than one paragraph, summarize the
details of the issue. This may take one or two paragraphs. End with a thesis statement that makes
an assertion about causes or what led to something.

Second Piece – Present your detailed support for your claim with a focus on the reasons
something has happened or a sequence of events that led to something.

Third Piece – Address the opposing views. What problems exist with your claim? Be sure to
bring the focus back to your points about the causes or sequence of events you address.

Fourth Piece – Finally, summarize the main points of your essay and relate your issue to the
bigger picture. If you see the current situation as something that needs to change, you can call for
change here, but your focus should be on emphasizing the causes of something.

TASK: Based on the lessons and videos presented in this Module, you are to write an
argumentative essay for each specified topic below. Make sure to include or use the
structure/method that you have learned in lesson 1.

Prompt 1. Write an argumentative essay arguing for the benefits of ECQ during the
pandemic, focusing on defining what ECQ really means.

Prompt 2. Write an argumentative essay explaining why Facebook remains popular

despite privacy complaints.