By James B. Freeman
This monograph first offers a style of diagramming argument macrostructure, synthesizing the traditional circle and arrow procedure with the Toulmin version. A theoretical justification of this technique via a dialectical figuring out of argument, a severe exam of Toulmin on warrants, a radical dialogue of the linked-convergent contrast, and an account of the correct reconstruction of enthymemes follows.
Read Online or Download Argument Structure:: Representation and Theory (Argumentation Library) PDF
Best rhetoric books
This monograph first provides a mode of diagramming argument macrostructure, synthesizing the traditional circle and arrow process with the Toulmin version. A theoretical justification of this technique via a dialectical realizing of argument, a severe exam of Toulmin on warrants, an intensive dialogue of the linked-convergent contrast, and an account of the right kind reconstruction of enthymemes follows.
This booklet records the result of a multi-year venture that investigated the targets for writing development between forty five scholars and their teachers in in depth classes of English as a moment Language (ESL) then, a 12 months later, in educational courses at Canadian universities. The researchers current an in depth framework to explain those objectives from the views of the scholars in addition to their teachers.
Utilizing the educating of writing as a subject matter concentration, this quantity describes how students take into consideration educating after they input a programme, indicates how their considering adjustments through the years and attributes the character and path of those adjustments to the content material and personality of the programmes.
This e-book is an try and learn what writing as technique may truly suggest. although solipsistic, even narcissistic, it could actually appear, this e-book is ready itself.
- Peers, Pirates, and Persuasion: Rhetoric in the Peer-to-Peer Debates
- Thou and You in Early Modern English Dialogues: Trials, Depositions, and Drama Comedy
- Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres
- Black Dogs and Blue Words: Depression and Gender in the Age of Self-Care
- Researching and applying metaphor in the real world
- La logique, ou, L'art de penser
Additional resources for Argument Structure:: Representation and Theory (Argumentation Library)
Should a proponent counter an undercutting defeater by conceding it and bringing forward some consideration in turn defeating its force, we should represent it just as we represented the counter to such a defeater in Fig. 25, but omitting the head of the arrow to the line connecting the defeater box to the core argument. There is yet a third way for a proponent to respond to rebutting defeaters. Instead of countering them, he may simply admit them as negatively relevant to the conclusion, but in effect claim that whatever negative force they have is completely defeated by the original premises.
If “No,” she may very well resume her traditional challenger role by asking why some rebuttal does not hold. Then the proponent must assume his traditional role to deal with the mooted rebuttal. Given that he does this successfully and the challenger eventually answers “Yes,”, we can imagine her similarly answering “Yes” for each of the remaining intermediate steps down to admitting that Q follows given the last intermediate step. 6 Concluding Remarks That we may find modalities, rebutting defeaters, undercutting defeaters, counterconsiderations in arguments as products and that in countering them the proponent enters the dialectical tier of argumentation shows that we should want to integrate 12 For a more detailed discussion of how arguments involving suppositions can be dialectically motivated, see our Freeman (1991, 221–228).
Toulmin has a radically different conception of argument structure. Just what this is and how it raises questions for the standard approach and indeed for the whole issue of recognizing the structure of arguments, we turn to next. 3 Toulmin’s Layout of Arguments In The Uses of Argument (1958), Stephen Toulmin proposes a radically different approach to displaying argument structure. We must, however, enter this caveat. Although we may read Toulmin as presenting a method for analyzing argument texts, arguments as products, which is a very natural reading and how some authors have read him, we must question whether this reading is appropriate.