Teaching Argument: An Introduction to the Toulmin Model

Author(s): Charles W. Kneupper

Source: College Composition and Communication , Oct., 1978, Vol. 29, No. 3 (Oct., 1978),
pp. 237-241
Published by: National Council of Teachers of English

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/356935

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

National Council of Teachers of English is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to College Composition and Communication

This content downloaded from

193.60.238.240 on Tue, 17 Oct 2023 01:13:17 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Teaching Afrgument:
An Introduction to the Youlmin Mfodel

CHARLES W. KNEUPPER

tended is
BECAUSE of its complexity, argument to explain the Toulmin model of
probably the most difficult formargument
of dis- and to suggest its utility as a
course to teach. Composition teachers
teaching tool.
receive little help from most standard
texts. A survey of composition texts re- I
veals at best an abbreviated treatment
of argument. The most commonly used Stephen Toulmin, in The Uses of Ar-
gument (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
approach to teaching argument is in-
versity Press, 1969), indicates that "the
struction in fallacies. This is a negative
approach to argument (it tells students science of logic has throughout its his-
what not to do), and used alone, it failstory tended to develop in a direction
to provide a positive sense of the neces-leading away . . . from practical ques-
tions about the manner in which we have
sary constituents of argument. Some
occasion to handle and criticize argu-
teachers of composition attempt to pro-
ments in different fields, and towards a
vide a more direct approach through in-
condition of complete autonomy, in
struction in syllogistic reasoning. Yet
many complaints are voiced against thiswhich logic becomes a theoretical study
approach, in part because of its burden-
of its own" (p. 4). Toulmin is critical of
some complexity but more importantly the disjuncture of formal logic and the
practical concerns of "real life" rhetorical
because logically valid syllogistic argu-
argument. In the context of a general
ments are rarely found in rhetorical dis-
course. Rhetoric deals in probabilitiestheory of argument, his model attempts
and relies on inductive modes or gen- to provide a working logic. In its simplest
eralizations based on inductive proc- form, the model contains three elements:
esses.'
Difficulties with syllogistic logic andDATA So, CLAIM
its usefulness as a heuristic device for
the invention of rhetorical argument are Since,
shared by Speech and English. Recently, WARRANT

speech instruction has largely abandoned

the syllogistic paradigm, and most recent
J. Anderson, Communication as Identificati
texts in public speaking, argumentation,
(New York: Harper and Row, 1975); John
and persuasion are now using a model Makay Speaking With an Audience (New
of argument developed by the philoso-York: Thomas Crowell, 1977); Gordon Zim-
merman et al., Speech Communication (Ne
pher, Stephen Toulmin.2 This essay is in-
York: West, 1977); Gerald Miller, Perspectiv
on Argumentation (Chicago: Scott, Foresma
1See Charles W. Kneupper, "Rhetoric and 1966); Richard D. Rieke and Malcolm 0. Sil-
Probability Theory," Central States Speech
lars, Argumentation and the Decision Making
Journal, 24 (Winter, 1973), 288-296. Process (New York: John Wiley and Sons,
2See for instance, Donald Byker and Loren
1975).

237

This content downloaded from

193.60.238.240 on Tue, 17 Oct 2023 01:13:17 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
238 COLLEGE COMPOSITION AND COMMUNICATION

An explicitly developed argument the probabilistic

must nature of rhetorical ar-
exhibit these three elements. The claimguments, Toulmin found it necessary to
is the conclusion of the argument and develop a more complex model. Erwin P.
Bettinghaus provides a useful schematic
the point at issue in a controversy. The
data is evidence for the claim. The War- of the fully-developed model3 (see be-
rant provides the link which shows the low): The three additional elements in
relation between data and claim. Toul- this model are qualifier, reservation, and
min provides the following example of backing. The qualifier is usually an ac-
an argument of this structure: knowledgment of the probabilistic na-
ture of the claim, the reservation spec-
ifies conditions in which the warrant
Harry was born So, Harry is a
in Bermuda British subject does not apply, the backing supports or
justifies the warrant.
Since, To illustrate this more complex form
A man born in Bermuda in a non-diagrammatic way, I have mod-
will be a British subject. ified an argument from Brockreide and
Ehninger:4
Arguments are not always explicitly de-
veloped in rhetorical discourse. War- 3Erwin P. Bettinghaus, "Structure and Argu-
rants, in particular, are frequently im- ment," Perspectives on Argument, ed. Gerald
plicit. Yet in controversial arguments,Miller (Chicago: Scott, Foresman, 1966), p.
implicit warrants are likely to be chal- 148.
lenged to become explicit and to be de- 4Wayne Brockriede and Douglas Ehringer,
fended. "Toulmin on Argument: An Interpretation and
Application," Quarterly Journal of Speech, 46
Because of this likely challenge and (February, 1960), 49.

This content downloaded from

193.60.238.240 on Tue, 17 Oct 2023 01:13:17 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE TOULMIN MODEL 239

(DATA) The historical consensus

able model ofof argument than syllogistic
opinion is that an unstable logic
balance
and aof useful heuristic for develop-
power led to World War ing I. (DATA)
an argumentative essay, the Toulmin
World leaders today recognize
model that
is also useful in discourse analysis
nuclear weapons are creatingand an im-
in teaching the "logical" outline. The
balance of power. (CLAIM) There-
diagram can be profitably applied to
fore, nuclear weapons development
(QUALIFIER) might lead to World many speeches and essays, and the ex-
War III, (WARRANT) since the im- amination of implicit missing elements
balance resulting from continued de- can be especially interesting.
velopment would be essentially similar To illustrate the potential usefulness of
to the power imbalance prior to World the Toulmin model in discourse analysis,
War I. (BACKING) Both imbalances I will apply the model to the first para-
were characterized by an arms race graph of Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience."
and dynamic power blocks. (RESER- For ease of reference, each sentence of
VATION) Our only hope is that fear the paragraph will be numbered.
of a nuclear war will be an effective
deterrent. 1. I heartily accept the motto, "That
government is best which governs
Although the substance of the argument least"; and I should like to see it
is debatable (rhetorical arguments usu- acted up to more rapidly and sys-
ally are), the important point is that by tematically.
explicitly following the model, a qualified 2. Carried out, it finally amounts to
and supported argument results. Because this, which also I believe, "That
the functional elements of the Toulmin government is best which governs
model are present in the explicit argu- not at all"; and when men are pre-
ment, the imputed relation between pared for it that will be the kind of
claim and evidence can be more easily government they will have.
3. Government is at best but an ex-
grasped and more specifically criticized.
pedient; but most governments are
In a more extended argumentative usually, and all governments are
essay, a chain of arguments might have sometimes, inexpedient.
been developed. Several paragraphs 4. The objections which have been
might be used to argue the accuracy of brought against a standing army,
the data through historical evidence and and they are many and weighty,
the use of authoritative opinion to es- and deserve to prevail, may also at
tablish the "factualness" of the data. last be brought against a standing
More detailed enumeration of the simi- government.
larities between the current situation and 5. The standing army is only an arm
of the standing government.
those preceding World War I could be
6. The government itself, which is
developed to strengthen the backing. A
only the mode which the people
coherent essay could result from the de- have chosen to execute their will,
velopment of each functional element of is equally liable to be abused and
the Toulmin model in the kernel argu- perverted before the people can
ment and from tying the interrelated act through it.
claims together in a conclusion.5 7. Witness the present Mexican War,
the work of a comparatively few
II individuals using the standing gov-
ernment as their tool; for, in the
Besides providing a more understand- outset, the people would not have
consented to this measure.
5See Rieke and Sillars, pp. 87-88 for a dis-
cussion and a schematic display of chained In analyzing this paragraph as an argu-
arguments. ment, one looks for its structure in terms

This content downloaded from

193.60.238.240 on Tue, 17 Oct 2023 01:13:17 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
240 COLLEGE COMPOSITION AND COMMUNICATION

should
of the way in which the functional function as data or backing.
ele-
ments of the Toulmin model areoutline
related-
structured in this pattern wo
i.e. one is looking for claim, warrant,
look something like this:
data, etc. and how they are related. I am
CLAIM
going to diagram a simplified form of I. A national program of
health care should be
Thoreau's argument. (Sentence numbers
in which the functional elements of the adopted.
WARRANT A. A national program
Toulmin model are apparent in the para- is necessary to deal
graph from Thoreau will be placed in with the magnitude
parentheses below the statement.) of the problem.

DATA QUALIFIER CLAIM

We are in a war to when men are Reduce or abolish
which the people would prepared for the power of the
not have consented. it (2) government
(7) (1,2)

Since,
WARRANT
Governments are inexpedient
(3)

BACKING
Arguments against a standing
army also apply to a standing
government. (4, 5, 6)

One interesting observation about thisDATA 1. Millions of peo-

argument is that there is no reservation. ple cannot afford
For Thoreau, the warrant is absolute, health care.

and less government or no government DATA 2. States, localities,

and charities
is only a matter of waiting until the time
cannot afford to
"men are prepared for it."
The Toulmin model treats the overall provide for so
functional relations of the claim and many people.
WARRANT B. A national program
provides insight into the structure of the is a moral impera-
argument. The model requires a holistic tive.
approach, which forces the analyst toDATA 1. The results of in-
determine the claim and then how other adequate health
material in the discourse is utilized to care are unnec-

develop and support that claim. essary death and

Another use for the model as a teach- suffering for mil-
lions.
ing tool is its application to the "logical"
outline. The application is very simple. BACKING 2. Failing to act to
correct this prob-
It amounts to giving students the follow- lem when we
ing instructions after they have been are capable of
taught the model: (1) Roman-numeral doing so leaves
levels should function as claims; (2) us morally re-
Capital-letter levels should function as sponsible.
warrants; (3) Arabic-numeral levels BACKING 3. Do unto others

This content downloaded from

193.60.238.240 on Tue, 17 Oct 2023 01:13:17 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE TOULMIN MODEL 241

as
asyou
you
would
would
adequately link the data to the claim,
have them do
that the claim is too general and needs
you.
greater qualification, etc. But the im-
portant point is that how they are argu-
When such a procedure is followed by ing will be clearer. The outline helps the
students, it does not guarantee that they student see relationships between parts
will produce satisfactory arguments. It of the argument and helps the teacher to
may be that they do not provide suf- criticize the argument more specifically.
ficient data, that the warrant fails to University of Texas at San Antonio

Qrades
This time of year, students like small birds
wait in the hall outside my office.
The sparrows at my winter feeder
seem to me more tame, less nervous.

I would scatter letters at their feet,

watch them squawk, scratch, and peck away,
squabbling with each other over
who gets F or D, C, B, or A.

But I may not. I invite them in

and to each lordly I dispense
as I see fit, knowing my distaste
for the act is little recompense.

Richard Behm
University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point

This content downloaded from

193.60.238.240 on Tue, 17 Oct 2023 01:13:17 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms