Linguistics Chapter 5 Mrieksecindd Page Userf Mrieksecindd Page Userf Analysis Argumentation Discover The Proposition

Unlock access to all the studying documents.

View Full Document

Analysis in

Argumentation

CHAPTER

KEY TERMS

discover the proposition, p. 72

question, p. 73

identify the question, p. 73

objectives and values p. 73

costs and risks, p. 74

determining issues, p. 75

uncontroversial matter, p. 75

clarity, p. 79

significance, p. 79

relevant, p. 79

inherency, p. 79

consistency, p. 80

locate the points of disagreement, p. 81

criteria, p. 81

support, p. 81

Much of your communication is an argument when you and others with whom

you communicate seek to justify claims. The argument can be a simple inter-

personal exchange about what to have for lunch, when to get a new cell phone,

what features to have on it, or whether to go to Saturday’s football game. Many other

situations involving your health and well being, and the lives of others including matters

of public policy produce claims that require more extensive justification.

Argumentation can even be a lengthy and involved process with hundreds of argu-

ments and issues developing around a single proposition of fact, value, or policy. Consider,

for instance the following:

On such claims, there are potentially an infinite number of related arguments because

by one chain of reasoning or another all potential arguments can be related. Certainly,

that is the assumption of the theologian who looks at the factual proposition, “There is a

God.” But even the theologian will select from all the potential claims those that will build

M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 71 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 71 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396 F-396F-396

72 PART 1 Principles

the best case for the proposition, “There is a God.” Because your time is limited, some

arguments are stronger than others for specific decision makers, and a smaller number

of more powerful arguments gain adherence better than a large number of weaker argu-

ments. To find the proposition you wish to argue, and the strongest claims that support it,

requires analysis: the examination of an argumentative situation for its claims and oppos-

ing claims to discover the issues and what arguments and support (evidence, values, and

credibility) are most important .

Analysis of argument is necessary, no matter at what point you enter the argumenta-

tion process. It may be your intention to seek the adherence of someone else to a claim, to

refute another’s claim, or to evaluate your own or someone else’s argumentation.

Analysis should be undertaken systematically and in advance of presenting arguments

to decision makers. Analysis is not simply a matter of acquiring knowledge. It is a process

whereby all the constituents of the argumentative situation are examined in such a way

that what needs to be argued and what it will take to gain adherence is revealed. With

Analysis has two somewhat distinctive parts. One part deals with developing a prop-

osition from a problem that requires resolution but you are not sure what that resolution

is—what Charles S. Peirce called a “feeling of doubt.” The second part is used after the

proposition has been identified. Then, the objective of analysis is to find the crucial is-

sues, understand their relative importance, and examine the claims to see what you must

CRITICAL ANALYSIS TO FIND A PROPOSITION

When you realize that there is some kind of a problem, when you have a “feeling of

doubt,” you frequently aren’t sure what to do about it. Critical decision making can be

used to help you discover the proposition you will argue. If you only express your feeling

of doubt you may gain the adherence of some others who are equally frustrated, but to

solve the problem you need a clearer statement of a proposition that provides a resolu-

tion. Statements such as the following have to be refined into propositions to which deci-

sion makers can respond:

How serious is sexual harassment on this campus?

Is global warming a serious threat to the planet?

How should we deal with illegal immigration?

Can we make good medical care available to all Americans?

M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 72 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 72 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396 F-396F-396

CHAPTER 5 Analysis in Argumentation 73

There are six stages to the selection of a proposition. However, an arguable proposi-

tion may appear at any time and you need not go through each stage. Your analysis should

help you to decide at what point to enter the process. If no one recognizes that a problem

exists, you must develop claims about the problem. But if everyone agrees that there is a

problem, you may skip that stage. Suppose virtually all the decision makers agree that glo-

bal warming is a significant threat to the health of the planet. In that case, you can slight

Identify the Question

The feeling of doubt that you have needs to be refined into a clearly stated question that rep-

resents the problem. In order to do this, you must entertain genuine doubt (Dewey, How We

Think ; Peirce). Ask yourself, “What are the potential meanings to my concern?” Entertain

the possibility of alternatives. From these, identify and face squarely the question that repre-

sents that feeling of doubt (Browne and Keeley; Millman 45; Ruggiero 92). In recent years,

there has been a concern over global warming. You obviously don’t begin with nothing. You

want to examine the question of global warming because you have heard some things about

it. Here are some examples of the thoughts you might have about the question:,

What is global warming and what problem does it pose to the world?

Are the earth’s surface temperatures rising?

Will the problem cause threats to future ecology?

Is global warming caused by humans?

Will restricting fossil fuel use alleviate the problem?

Does a solution require a radical change of society?

Search For New Information

Using words such as facts or data often masks the complexity of information seeking.

Information means overcoming ambiguity in language, developing a measure of the quality

of evidence, searching for errors in discovery or measurement of data, and thinking about

significant information that is missing (Browne and Keeley). The global warming question

Survey Implicated Objectives, Values, and Biases

From your experience, research, and thought, identify those objectives and values that

seem to be related to the question that concerns you. Locate the ultimate purpose of your

M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 73 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 73 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396 F-396F-396

74 PART 1 Principles

argumentation—what in the long run are you trying to accomplish? You need to ask:

What problems seem to need addressing? What might an ideal system look like? What

values do you wish to see embodied in such a program? Knowing what is sought in the

Canvass Alternative Decisions

Sometimes people look for alternative decisions only long enough to find the first

one that fits; sometimes they look only for the alternatives that seem most attractive.

Sometimes they use a small list of handy criteria and eliminate alternatives until one is

left, and sometimes people just muddle through, choosing by hit or miss (Janis and Mann

21–41; Ruggiero 92). To be critical means to examine the widest range of alternative

2. People should develop voluntary programs to reduce carbon emissions by revising

infrastructure, hybrid cars, more efficient electrical equipment, and so forth.

4. The United States should enact a Cap and Trade program to reduce carbon emissions

to the internationally agreed to levels.

Weigh the Costs and Risks to the Alternatives

1. If global warming exists then the status quo will bring the predicted negative effects

to the world.

3. Alternate sources of energy will be more dangerous, insufficient, or costly than coal

and oil.

4. Cap and Trade will damage the American economy, cause a loss of jobs, and make

government intrusive on the economy.

Select a Proposition

Selecting a proposition is the last of the six stages of critical decision making. In it a

proposition is found that best answers the problem posed by a “feeling of doubt.” The

proposition you elect will be the product of considering the information, objectives, and

M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 74 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 74 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396 F-396F-396

CHAPTER 5 Analysis in Argumentation 75

values you have along with the costs and risks. Note that it is not a matter of selecting the

“true” solution you will be looking for the proposition that has the greatest probability of

solving the problem. There will still be claims that can be advanced against the proposi-

tion but you are looking for the most probable one. And you must also realize that you

may modify your proposition as new information comes to light just as Congress, or

other legislative bodies do. They amend proposals to eliminate troublesome objections.

Traditionally, after you have selected a proposition, you will be expected to consider

three other steps: (1) make plans to implement the proposition, (2) prepare contingency

plans, and (3) build a case for your decision. These will be covered in Chapter 6 , “Case

Building.”

CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF A PROPOSITION

Any proposition is analyzed by identifying the various claims (fact, value, and policy)

that are available to support or oppose it. Take note of what others are saying and what

you can think of about the proposition, and then state the claims that are both expressed

and implied. By matching up opposing claims you can find the crucial issues. These issues

Determining the Issues

A simple method for determining issues is to make a list of arguments for, and a list of

arguments against the proposition and then match them up (see Table 5.1 ).

Should the United States adopt a Cap and Trade program to reduce carbon emissions to

the internationally agreed to levels?

M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 75 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 75 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396 F-396F-396

TABLE 5.1

Arguments For and Against

For Against

A. Global surface temperatures have

been increasing during the twentieth

Some data suggest that earth is

getting colder since 1998.

All major science academies in the

industrialized world support this claim.

and El Nino account for warming

since 1900.

D. Industrialized countries produce 10 times the

2 of undeveloped

China and India are increasing

E. International agreements to limit emissions

14% below 2005 levels by 2020, 83% below

2005 levels by 2050.

Companies below their allocation can trade with

others. Those over their quota pay a carbon tax.

polluters

In effect in Europe

1990.

It is a free enterprise solution

perhaps now but not by 2020.

H. It is socialistic. Government has final

say in reorganizing the economy

New jobs new cleaner industries

I. Will wreck the economy and cost

send American industry overseas.

M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 76 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 76 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396 F-396F-396

FIGURE 5.1

Issues in Global Warming

1. Have global surface temperatures been increasing during the twentieth century

and will they continue to rise?

2. Will rising temperatures threaten the ecology of the world?

3. Is the temperature increase caused by human activity of burning carbon fuels

producing green house gases?

4. Do industrialized countries such as the United States produce 90% of

worldwide CO

2 emissions?

5. Would a Cap and Trade system in the United States stabilize the level of

greenhouse gas?

6. Is Cap and Trade a free enterprise solution?

7. Will the Cap and Trade system shrink the U. S. Gross Domestic Product, cut

800,000 jobs, and shift manufacturing overseas?

There are more arguments raised for and against an American Cap and Trade system,

but these seven issues are a reasonable summary. They reflect the fundamental questions

to be addressed in order to make a critical decision.

Rank-Order Issues

The first stage in the process of locating the issues more specifically is to rank-order them

based on their significance—degree of involvement and disagreement—among decision

makers. Permit us to illustrate how you might examine these issues based on what we

know from following the topic.

The argument about global warming is an extremely complex question based on scien-

tific analysis rooted in cause and effect that is always more difficult to prove. If an arguer

could prove to the satisfaction of decision makers that (Issue 10) global temperatures are

not increasing then none the subsequent issues would be important. There is no need to con-

sider the effect of rising temperatures (Issue 20) or cause (issues 3 and 4) or a Cap and Trade

system to control surface temperatures (Issues 5–7) if there is no rise in surface tempera-

tures. There are people who claim that global warming is a hoax. However, the overwhelm-

ing scientific agreement and even countries that signed the Kyoto Protocol and participated

in subsequent summits on the matter would make issue 1 difficult to argue against.

A similar situation exists with issues 2 and 4. It seems difficult to argue against the

science that says the rising temperatures will threaten the ecology of the world or that

industrial countries produce the most CO

2 . However, issue 3 (Is the temperature increase

caused by human activity of burning carbon fuels producing greenhouse gases?) is a more

M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 77 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 77 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396 F-396F-396

78 PART 1 Principles

controversial point. To a significant extent, this is caused by the fact that it is so difficult

to prove cause. Still a significantly large majority of the scientific community accepts CO

as the major cause.

Issue 5 is interesting because it stands at the crossroad between arguments about the

nature and cause of global warming, and the possible solution. Arguments that claim

Cap and Trade will seriously damage the American economy make it a vital issue of

comparative advantage. If a Cap and Trade system in the United States would stabilize

the greenhouse gas situation, then we would avoid the damage to the world ecology that

proponents claim in Issue 3. At the same time, it might bring on the negative effects on the

United States claimed in Issue7. This makes Issue 5 central to a comparative advantage

case, which will be discussed in Chapter 6 (Case Building). It is central to an argument not

about what is right or wrong but what is more (or less) advantageous.

The process of rank-ordering the issues requires you to consider not only what you

think, or what an opponent might think, but also the preconceptions of the decision mak-

ers. Such speculation can lead to a number of different conclusions, but our analysis so far

produces the following rank-order:

Issue 7, first in significance: Would a Cap and Trade system significantly damage (or

help) the American economy?

Issue 5, second in significance: Would a Cap and Trade system in the United States

stabilize the level of greenhouse gases?

Issue 3, third in importance: Is the temperature increase caused by human activity?

Issue 1, fourth in significance: Have global temperatures been increasing during the

twentieth century (will they continue to rise)?

Issue 2, fifth in significance: Will rising temperatures threaten the ecology of the world?

Issue 4, sixth in significance: Do industrialized countries such as the United States

produce 90% of worldwide CO

2 emissions?

Issue 6, seventh in significance: Is Cap and Trade a free enterprise (or socialistic) solution?

M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 78 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 78 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396 F-396F-396

CHAPTER 5 Analysis in Argumentation 79

Assuming this is the order of significance does not mean that you will want your case

to develop the issues in the same order. It rather indicates where the greatest emphasis of

argument and support must be placed.

What Critical Values Will Be Applied?

Because different demands will be placed on your case as you move from one context or

sphere to another, it makes sense to pay attention to the way each set of decision makers

approaches the decision task. We will identify five generic values usually relevant to deci-

sion making that can guide your analysis of each situation.

Significance. What is highly significant to you may be less so to your decision makers.

We all have hierarchies of concerns. Special interest groups such as environmentalists or

abortion opponents often seem to think that everyone shares their fervor, which is often

not the case. For example, if someone asks you whether global warming is significant to

you, you may say it is, but not significant enough to donate money to the cause or attend

a conference. It helps to have an idea of where your significance coincides or does not

coincide with that of the decision makers.

Inherency. Decision makers might agree with an argument you make but be less inclined

to follow your position because they do not believe you have identified a problem that

is inherent in the system. Inherency means that a weakness is a permanent attribute or

characteristic of something. For instance, in arguing for action on global warming, you

would need to claim that the weaknesses in the status quo are inherent. They are so deeply

imbedded that no minor modifications such as changing light bulbs and buying a hybrid

car can solve them. Inherency puts a powerful obligation on an arguer, much more than

significance or relevancy. Try to estimate how your decision makers perceive your argu-

ments and the arguments that oppose you on inherency.

M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 79 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 79 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396 F-396F-396

80 PART 1 Principles

notion that the charge of inconsistency is a winning argument” (Sillars 3). Unfortunately,

one person’s consistency is another’s confusion as different argument elements are identi-

fied as needing to be consistent with one another.

Although you want your decision makers to believe concepts you argue are con-

sistent with one another, it will be important for you to learn the decision makers’

ANALYSIS OF CLAIMS

When the proposition is reduced to a workable series of issues of fact and value, the most

significant identified, and the values by which they will be tested observed, you must fur-

ther refine your analysis by focusing on each fact or value claim used to support or oppose

the proposition. Your objective is to look closely at your ultimate purpose: What are you

trying to accomplish with your proposition? We discussed the ordering of issues earlier

Clarify What Each Claim Asserts

At this point, you have a rank-ordered series of issues, and you have recognized the rela-

tive importance of each. Next, you need to analyze each of them to locate the specific

nature of the issue.

1 Some guidelines for such analysis involve establishing criteria for

evaluating each claim and then finding the point at which the claim is most vulnerable

to rebuttal. Disagreements may arise over the criteria themselves, the relationship of the

claim to the criteria, or the relationship of the support to the criteria.

1. Identify the value object and value hierarchy?

2. Establish the criteria for the values?

3. Do the facts correspond to the definitions?

4. What are the applications of the values? (Freeley 55; Warnick, Inch, and Endres 233–236).

CHAPTER 5 Analysis in Argumentation 81

Locate the Points of Disagreement

To evaluate a claim you must locate the points of disagreement over it. As you do this

work, you will be setting up the basis on which to evaluate the strength of the claim. We

will suggest four locations for disagreement:

LOCATION I: By what criteria should the claim be judged?

LOCATION II: Which criteria are the most important?

By What Criteria Should the Claim Be Judged? Let us assume that in arguing for a U. S.

Cap and Trade emissions program you chose the following criteria :

It must reduce CO

2 levels 14% below 2005 levels by 2020.

It must not unduly damage the American economy.

It must allow for flexibility in a company’s response.

Which Criteria Are the Most Important? Even when criteria are agreed on, there can

still be a disagreement over which criterion is most important. For instance, suppose that

proponents and opponents agree on three criteria as identified previously. They still could

disagree over which criterion is most important. Those who support the proposition

probably believe that reducing the CO

2 levels is the most important criterion. Opponents

probably believe that the second criterion is the most important because of the damage to

the economy. So, there is an issue over which criterion is most important.

To What Extent Does the Claim Satisfy the Criteria? Even if both sides agree to the

criteria for an acceptable government system, they still can disagree that Cap and Trade

can satisfy the criteria. The program by these criteria will be so extensive as to strengthen

other arguments against it such as bureaucracy and costs in taxes. Opponents might claim

What Is the Strength of Support for the Claim? Every argument must ultimately rest on

some kind of support (evidence, values, or credibility). The arguments as we have stated them

are not supported. To fully argue either for or against, there must be more than assertion.

Therefore, it is necessary to find the available support and evaluate it as a part of the case.

Particularly on factual claims, the support necessary will usually emphasize evidence

(examples, statistics, and testimony). An arguer needs to find the strongest possible evidence

82 PART 1 Principles

for a position. Although values and credibility can be strong bases to support arguments,

they are most effective when linked to evidence.

What evidence is most trustworthy to decision makers on the global warming ques-

tion: Personal examples? Scientific studies? Testimony of experts?

CONCLUSION

People determine where argumentation begins. They discover problems and determine

how these problems will be resolved. They frequently do this in a hit-or-miss fashion from

limited knowledge and analysis. The adherence of others can be more easily developed if

the analysis of problems takes place systematically rather than haphazardly.

Once a proposition has been determined, it can be more specifically analyzed. A policy

proposition is analyzed by looking for the clash of arguments as in a debate, rank-ordering

the issues, and finding which of four critical values apply: clarity, significance, relevance,

and consistency. Thus, by looking at both sides of the proposition, the arguer can discover

the issues of fact or value that are likely to be most crucial. Each value and factual claim

is analyzed by finding criteria for the judgment term in the claim with which to measure

the subject term. Issues about fact and value claims will be found in one of four locations:

2. The relative importance of various criteria.

4. The strength of support for the criteria.

When the proposition is identified, the issues discovered, and their specific natures iden-

tified, the arguer can then determine what must be argued and how best to build a case for it.

EXERCISES/PROJECTS

Many newspapers, including USA Today , have a regular feature of printing two opposing editori-

als on current topics. Congressional Quarterly also features such exchanges. Find one of these

exchanges and determine the issues in the controversy.

M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 82 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396M05_RIEK0596_08_SE_C05.indd Page 82 17/01/12 1:03 PM user-f396 F-396F-396