33
required by this argument: that everyone likes cooked pork and the only matter for
argument is how to cook it.1 You can see from these examples that in an enthymeme
what has been left out is sometimes as important as what is explicitly stated. Unstated but
A Comparison of the Syllogism, Enthymeme, and Toulmin Model
Of the three models to use for analyzing and summarizing an argument—the
syllogism, the enthymeme, and the Toulmin model—the Toulmin model has some
advantages that make it the best model for both reading and writing argument. Its most
essential advantage is that it invites more shared common ground and more audience
participation, in the form of give and take, than do the other two models. The syllogism,
for instance, lays out a summary statement of the main line of reasoning in the form of
than does the syllogism. The audience is expected to supply the parts of the argument that
are not explicitly stated. This increases the possibility of interaction between author and
audience. Still, when the audience has completed the enthymeme, the argument is
complete. No further give-and-take is invited or required.
The Toulmin model goes beyond both the syllogism and the enthymeme in
inviting argument participation, encouraging an exchange of views, and establishing
common ground. The backing, rebuttal, and qualifier of the Toulmin model, in particular,
require an arguer both to anticipate other perspectives and views and, at times, to
argument outcomes. These features make the Toulmin model the most valuable of the
three models for examining the multiple perspectives likely to be expressed in response
to complex modern issues.
A critic of the Toulmin model has questioned the utility of the model because, he
claims, the first three parts of the model are essentially like the syllogism and the