ARGUMENTS IN CRITICAL

WRITING
• In critical thinking, an argument is defined as Argument.
A set of statements, one of which is the conclusion and the others are
the premises.

Building Good Arguments

In building good arguments, students and professionals

usually follow two established methods that are effective
both in academic and professional settings.
You may choose whatever you deem is more effective
depending on the type of issue that you raise.
Toulmin Method

Philosopher Stephen Toulmin offers six elements of a well-reasoned argument and explains
how they all work together.

The basic format of the Toulmin Method is as follows:

1. Claim

A claim is a debatable statement that requires proof.

• Fact
Example: Today is Sunday.

• Judgment or Evaluation
Example: Brand X is more effective in removing stains than
Brand Y.
• Policy

Example: All students, both senior high school and college, should wear
their IDs at all times inside school premises.

Keep in mind that a claim is only the starting-point for a fully developed
argument.
2. Reason

A reason is a statement justifying the claim (e.g. a “because”-clause).

A reason then invites evidence(sometimes called data) to support a claim

and show its validity.

For example:

"You do not have to study for the exam[CLAIM]

because classes are suspended today” [REASON].
How do you know that?
“The University has already made an announcement through their social media
accounts and official website” [EVIDENCE].

However, will your audience believe the evidence?

That might depend on the credibility of University’s
social media pages and website, or whether whomever
you are trying to convince is willing to accept that the
social media accounts and the website you stated are
authentic and verified. If your audience accepts the
evidence, they will see your claim as valid.
3. Qualifier
• A qualifier is a word or phrase (adjective or adverb) that limits
the scope or “generalizability” of your claim.

• Without a qualifier, your claim may seem too broad or unrealistic for
your readers.

For example, if you say "The citizens dislike the current

government" you would be making an overstatement or
overgeneralization. It is simply not true that "all" citizens
dislike the current government. Hence, a more reasonable
claim, a claim for which you are likely to find supporting
evidence, would be "Many citizens dislike the current
government."
Using qualifiers appropriately also helps you to avoid binary or “either/or” thinking, which can
invalidate an argument.
Instead of using the following qualifiers:
• always
• never
• all
• none, no
• totally, completely, absolutely
Try using the following qualifiers:
• sometimes, at times, occasionally, usually, frequently
• many, many a, some, more (or if applicable, a precise number or amount)
• a small number, a few, most (or if applicable, a precise number or amount)
• likely, possibly, probably
4. Warrant
• A warrant is an assumption or point of agreement shared by the arguer and the audience.
In argument, we rely frequently on these fundamental shared assumptions.
• Warrants may remain unspoken (but understood) when a writer and reader can be
expected to know or agree on them.

This is normally the case for general knowledge and widely

accepted facts. If readers do not share the same assumptions
about the validity of the writer’s evidence, or if they do not
recognize the assumption, they might not accept the evidence
or claim.
5. Backing

• Backing is additional information that justifies or enhances the credibility of your evidence.
You need this to ensure that you audience will accept your evidences or claims.

• For example, if you give evidence like "Our Lady of Fatima University is one of the top-
quality educational institutions in the Philippines, "you may need to add,“ They have
produced hundreds of board exam top-notchers in the past with a 100% passing rate for
many college programs across its six campuses.“

For this backing to work, you and your audience must share
an understanding about what having numerous board exam
top-notchers and a perfect passing rate implies. This understanding
would be a warrant.
6. Conditions of Rebuttal

Conditions of rebuttal are the potential objections to an argument. To deal with possible
objections, imagine a skeptical yet reasonable reader poking holes in your claim and reasons
or coming up with opposite, equally valid reasons. Finally, this diagram shown below may help
you visualize how all the elements in Toulmin's model work together:
Rogerian Method
The Rogerian Method (named for, but not developed by, influential American
psychotherapist Carl R. Rogers) is a popular method for controversial issues. This
strategy seeks to find a common ground between parties by making the audience
understand perspectives that stretch beyond (or even run counter to) the writer’s
position. It places an emphasis on reiterating an opponent's argument to his or her
satisfaction.
The persuasive power of the Rogerian Method lies
in its ability to define the terms of the argument in such a way that:
• your position seems like a reasonable compromise
• you seem compassionate and empathetic
The Rogerian Method features the following elements:

1. Introduction
Introduce the issue to the audience while sticking with objectivity as much as
possible. “The issue of whether nursing students should apply for internship
in hospitals with COVID-19 cases or not is still
subject to extensive discussion.”
2. Opposing View

Explain the other side’s position in an unbiased way. “Some parents believe that
internship in hospitals, in spite of the current pandemic, is essential for learning and for
boosting the students’ professional and technical competence.”
3. Statement of Validity (Understanding)

This section discusses how you acknowledge how the other side’s points of view can be
valid under certain circumstances. You identify how and why their perspective makes
sense while you still present your own argument. “Those parents who agree with the
internship argue that working in hospitals amidst the surge in COVID-19 cases opens up
more opportunities for the students to learn and accept the reality
of their future profession.”
4. Statement of Your Position

In this section, you explain your own stance. “Students should not be forced to pursue
internship in hospitals with active cases of COVID-19 because the risks and disadvantages
outweigh the projected benefits.”
5. Statement of Contexts

Explore scenarios in which your position has merit. “However, although the lack of
professional merit and insufficiency in technical knowledge among students
increase their chance of contracting the infection, internship should still be offered
as an option, provided that all safety standards and protocols are strictly
observed.”
6. Statement of Benefits

You should conclude by explaining to the opposing side why they would benefit from
accepting your position. “Although both sides offer their own advantages and disadvantages,
the safety of the students should still be prioritized above everything else as learning does
not mean anything if something bad happens to the students in the process.”
You have to be objective as much as possible without sacrificing your
own stance.
You should end your argument with clarity about what you are
arguing for.
THANK YOU!