CHAPTER 9
HOW ARE FACTUAL PROPOSITIONS ARGUED?
True or False
9-1 Factual argumentation is used in a number of fields to pursue new knowledge and
interpret existing knowledge.
9-2 Although argumentation as inquiry, or knowledge seeking, can be used in value and
9-3 As you investigate the historical background of a factual proposition, collect
sufficient research and commentary by experts in the field to give you an understanding
of the topic.
9-4 In factual argumentation, arguments about effect focus on units of argument that call
attention to the consequences of what has happened, is happening, or will happen.
9-5 In factual argumentation, arguments about significance focus on units of argument
that call the audience’s attention to the consequences of what has happened, is happening,
9-6 In factual argumentation, arguments about significance focus on units of argument
that call the audience’s attention to why the consequences of what has happened, is
happening, or will happen are important.
9-7 In factual argumentation, arguments about inherency focus on calling the audience’s
9-8 A pre-emptive argument establishes the probability of something being true in the
future.
9-9 The idea of briefing arguments is adapted from the field of law and legal brief
writing.
9-10 A brief should contain your main points, subpoints, and the evidence that supports
them in your argument.
9-11 The opponent in factual argumentation may not dispute the topicality of the
9-12 The clarity of the opponent’s position is enhanced if it begins with a statement of
his philosophy of opposition which previews his strategy and tells the audience in general
terms how he will respond to the advocate’s arguments.
9-13 Although the advocate must consider presumption in building a prima facie case in
factual argumentation, the opponent need not consider it in determining what to argue
and how to argue it.
9-14 In using the stock issues in factual argumentation, the opponent should determine
whether the pattern of reasoning used by the advocate is sufficient to show the probable
9-15 In using the stock issues in factual argumentation, the opponent should determine
whether the advocate has offered proof that is sufficient to show the probable truth of the
primary inference about the proposition.
9-16 A denial argument suggests the advocate’s argument is weak because it misanalyzes
the situation and the opponent will provide the proper analysis.
9-17 Denial arguments suggest the advocate’s argument is weak because it overlooks
certain important facts which the opponent provides.
9-18 Extenuation arguments claim that the advocate has knowingly distorted information
9-19 The opponent’s strategy of extenuation is a form of refutation in which the claim is
made that the advocate has failed to determine what is required to establish the alleged
fact or has failed to provide sufficient proof or reasoning to establish the alleged fact.
9-20 The opponent must always respond to the advocate’s preemptive arguments, even if
they are straw man arguments.
Multiple Choice
9-1 What can factual argumentation be used to accomplish?
(a) Interpret existing knowledge.
(b) Advance value and policy arguments.
(c) Inquire as to what is rational to believe about a topic.
9-2 In factual argumentation, we can seek knowledge by treating the proposition as a
hypothesis to be tested. Which of the following steps would NOT be part of your
hypothesis testing?
(a) Decide what question or problem involving fact may be found in the factual
proposition.
(b) Formulate a primary inference on the subject by defining terms or clarifying
what the question or problem asks you to answer or solve.
(c) Demonstrate the disparity of not accepting your interpretation of facts.
(d) Discover those issues and their supporting arguments that deny the primary
inference is probably true.
9-3 As an advocate developing a prima facie case for your proposition of fact, you must
develop arguments of significance to support your main points. Significance often is a
way of focusing on this element of the analysis of propositions. What is it that draws our
attention to a subject or controversy and are often what gives it significance?
(a) The immediate cause.
(b) The stock issues.
(c) The historical background.
(d) The primary inference.
9-4 In developing arguments to advocate and oppose a proposition of fact, how should
you use the stock issues for analyzing factual propositions?
(a) To develop the primary inference for your proposition of fact.
(b) To decide what main points (contentions) to use in developing your proposition
of fact.
(c) To create an explanation of the appropriate hierarchy of fact in which you want
your audience to locate your interpretation of fact.
(d) All of the above
9-5 What purpose do the stock issues for factual argumentation serve?
(a) To verify the relationship between the subject and predicate of the proposition
through appropriate reasoning patterns.
(b) To discover whether information confirms or denies the inferred relationship
between the subject and predicate of the proposition.
(c) To argue the probable truth or falsity of the primary inference.
(d) All of the above
9-6 In preparing a prima facie case for factual argumentation, the advocate must
(a) state appropriate criteria to be used in judging the probable truth of the inference.
(b) consider what the audience presently values.
(c) consider what proof the audience needs to convince them of the probable truth of
the primary inference.
(d) state whether simple or complex arguments are being offered.
9-7 As an advocate for a proposition of fact, you may use presumption as a way of
identifying common practices and experiences that relate to your subject. What other use
might you make of presumption?
(a) Presumption may be used as a method for analyzing your audience to discover
what sources of information and what kinds of reasoning the audience will find
most credible for arguments on this subject.
(b) Presumption may be used to discover the issues and their supporting arguments
that will encourage the audience to accept that the primary inference for your
proposition of fact is probably true.
(c) Presumption may be used to locate an immediate cause that signifies something
important about the topic.
(d) Presumption may be used to determine what objections the opposition may raise
so that you can develop preemptive arguments.
9-8 In factual argumentation, arguments about _________ focus on units of argument
that call the audience’s attention to why the consequences of what has happened, is
happening, or will happen are important.
(a) effect
(b) inherency
(c) significance
(d) extenuation
9-9 In advocating the proposition “equipping cars with anti-lock brakes does not reduce
accidents,” an argument claiming “drivers with ABS-equipped cars drive faster and
follow closer than drivers without ABS” would constitute
(a) an effect argument.
(b) an inherency argument.
(c) a significance argument.
(d) a pre-emptive argument.
9-10 In arguing factual propositions, arguments concerning inherency
(a) need not be made.
(b) can only be presented concerning propositions of past fact.
(c) address why the primary inference about the proposition is the case.
(d) are replaced by the use of preemptive arguments.
9-11 In opposing the proposition “equipping cars with anti-lock brakes does not reduce
accidents,” an argument stating “teaching drivers to use anti-lock brakes properly, by
applying them forcefully won’t prevent them from overdriving the conditions” would be
(a) an effect argument.
(b) an inherency argument.
(c) a significance argument.
(d) a pre-emptive argument.
9-12 The opponents first strategic decision is to
(a) determine whether to accept the advocate’s primary inference as topical.
(b) decide how to employ presumption to refute the advocate’s case.
(c) determine whether to use strategies of denial and extenuation to dispute the
advocate’s case.
(d) decide how to deal with any preemptive arguments the advocate has offered.
9-13 In preparing to oppose a factual proposition, the opponent’s first task is to
(a) decide how many extenuation arguments to use.
(b) examine the criteria the advocate used to evaluate the topic.
(c) provide his own definition of terms.
(d) examine the inference made by the advocate in her interpretation of the
proposition.
9-14 In factual argumentation, presumption
(a) resides with the advocate and is natural when the proposition is treated as a
hypothesis to be tested when we use argumentation to seek knowledge.
(b) resides with the opponent and is natural when the proposition is treated as a
hypothesis to be tested when we use argumentation to seek knowledge.
(c) resides with the advocate abd is artificial when the proposition is treated as a
hypothesis to be tested when we use argumentation to seek knowledge.
(d) resides with the opponent and is artificial when the proposition is treated as a
hypothesis to be tested when we use argumentation to seek knowledge.
9-15 In arguing propositions of fact, as an opponent you have two strategies for
responding to the advocate’s arguments, denial and extenuation. What must you examine
to decide whether strategies of denial and extenuation will be appropriate for refuting the
advocate’s arguments?
(a) How the advocate uses presumption.
(b) How the advocate defined terms.
(c) How the advocate’s placement of arguments of effect, significance, and
inherency organized the message.
(d) How the advocate’s arguments satisfy the requirements of the stock issues of
factual argumentation.
9-16 In opposing an argument made by the advocate, you have decided to use a strategy
of denial. You may NOT employ the strategy of denial in which of the following
circumstances?
(a) The advocate has offered a preemptive argument and you will explain why the
preemptive argument is an accurate denial from your perspective on the
proposition.
(b) The advocate has overlooked certain important facts which you will provide
along with an explanation of the significance of their having been overlooked.
(c) The advocate has given undue significance to certain facts and you will explain
why these facts lack significance.
(d) The advocate has drawn unwarranted conclusions from her proof and you will
provide the proper conclusion.
9-17 In opposing an argument made by the advocate, you argue that the advocate has
misanalyzed the situation and that the analysis you provide is the proper one. You are
using the strategy of opposition know as
(a) using the benefit of presumption.
(b) denial.
(c) extenuation.
(d) responding preemptively.
9-18 __________ arguments focus on the circumstances surrounding the facts and are
used by the opponent to suggests that the advocate has a limited understanding of these
circumstances.
(a) Extenuation
(b) Denial
(c) Pre-emptive
(d) Kitchen sink
9-19 In using extenuation arguments to refute the advocate’s case, the opponent argues
(a) that the relationship inferred by the advocate is based on a limited
understanding of the circumstances.
(b) that a more complete understanding of the circumstances leads to a different
inference.
(c) that unusual circumstances warrant a conclusion of than the one normally
drawn when these facts are present.
(d) All of the above
9-20 The opponents final strategic decision is to
(a) determine whether to accept the advocate’s primary inference as topical.
(b) decide how to employ presumption to refute the advocate’s case.
(c) determine whether to use strategies of denial and extenuation to dispute the
advocate’s case.
(d) decide how to deal with any preemptive arguments the advocate has offered.