Transcript Move Over, Monty Python: Tim and Jim's Argument Clinic Is

Move Over, Monty Python: Tim and
Jim's Argument Clinic Is Here!
Tim McGee and Jim Castagnera
(who release this work into the public domain)
A Note on the Currency of Our Topic
Monty Python’s Argument Clinic
Sketch
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3rip
SM
Session Description
Despite the apparent decline of reasoned debate in
some public spheres, argument persists as the
privileged mode of discourse in the academy where we
face the ongoing need to teach students to analyze and
produce arguments suited to various audiences and
intentions. The presenters will argue that this
obligation, while daunting, is doable, and will provide
attendees with practical approaches from the fields of
law and rhetoric. Participants will be introduced to
stasis theory as a way to categorize arguments and the
Toulmin schema as a way to help students apply critical
thinking and informal logic to socially situated
arguments.
Definitions of Argument Offered
in the Monty Python Sketch
1. “An argument is a connected series of
statements to establish a definite
proposition.”
2. “An argument is an intellectual process.
Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying
of anything the other person says.”
Discussion of Questions 1-4
• The “Session Description” is primarily descriptive.
• While it makes multiple assertions, it offers no
reasons in support of those assertions and is,
therefore, not an argument, strictly speaking.
• While each “definition” approximates the method
of a good Aristotelian definition (genus and
differens) , both fall somewhat short.
• The first comes closer to that standard than the
second.
How “Aristotelian” Definitions Work
Church: a public building, regularly used for
prayer, primarily Christian.
First, place the term to be defined in the next
largest category, (public building), then
differentiate it from other members of that
category (restaurant, theater, etc.), then
differentiate further (temple, mosque, etc.).
Aristotle
Aristotle’s Minimum Requirements
for an Argument
• An argument must have two parts: an
assertion and a reason in support of the
assertion.
• Some of Aristotle’s examples:
– “She has given birth, for she has milk.”
– “If the war is the cause of present evils, things
should be set right by making peace.”
– “If not even the gods know everything, human
beings can hardly do so.”
Organizational Preview
• The Main Challenges
–
–
–
–
Problematic notions of proof
Confusion over validity and truth
Ignorance of the modes of discourse
Starting with more challenging (“higher”) stases
• Effective Solutions
–
–
–
–
Prohibition of the term
Careful policing of vocabulary
Introduction to the modes of discourse
Baby steps: Definitional, then Value arguments
Notions of Proof as a Mixed Blessing
• “All art constantly aspires to the condition of
music.” –Walter Pater
• “All argument aspires to the condition of
deductive certainty.” –Tim and Jim
• “Therefore, I have proven . . .” –Student
Author
• Solution: If it’s not a math class, the words
“proof” and “prove” should be banned, as few
arguments actually achieve deductive
certainty.
Some Relationships between
Validity and Truth
• Assertions can be true or false.
• Deductive argument structures can be valid or
invalid.
• A valid structure with true premises
guarantees a true conclusion.
• A valid structure with false premises
guarantees nothing.
• An invalid structure guarantees nothing,
regardless of the truth of its premises.
An Invalid Categorical Syllogism
God is love.
Love is blind.
Ray Charles is blind.
________________
Therefore, Ray Charles is God.
This “syllogism” exhibits two formal fallacies,
quaternio terminorum and an undistributed
middle term.
Valid vs. Invalid Forms
of Categorical Syllogisms
Valid
All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
_________________
Socrates is mortal.
Invalid
All men are mortal.
Socrates is mortal.
________________
Socrates is a man.
(Here, the middle term is
“man/men”)
(Here, the middle term is
mortal.)
(The “middle term” is the one
that doesn’t appear in the
conclusion. )
Venn Diagram Illustration
“Socrates is mortal” guaranteed.
No guarantee that Socrates is a man.
Mortals
Mortals
Men
Men
Socrates
Socrates
Argument and Persuasion Are
Not Synonymous
Persuasion
Argument
Threats
Seduction
Bribery
Argument is the form of persuasion that proceeds primarily by reasoned discourse.
The Modes of Discourse
•
•
•
•
Exposition
Description
Narration
Argument
This traditional approach to categorizing text
types has fallen out of favor because few texts
are purely one type or another.
Stasis Theory
“Stasis theory is a four-question pre-writing (invention)
process developed in ancient Greece by Aristotle and
Hermagoras. Later, the stases were refined by Roman
rhetoricians, such as Cicero, Quintilian, and Hermogenes.”
The four stases of Greco-Roman rhetoric:
•
•
•
•
the facts (conjecture)
the meaning or nature of the issue (definition)
the seriousness of the issue (quality)
the plan of action (policy).
Source: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/736/01/
Revised Stasis Theory
(As presented in Writing Arguments)
• Six Types of Claims
– Simple Categorical (X is Y)
– Definitional (X is Y; meaning of Y contested)
– Evaluation (X is a good/bad Y)
– Resemblance (X is like Y)
– Cause/Consequence (X causes Y)
– Proposal (We should do X)
Definitional Argument Exercise
• United States v. Microsoft , 1988
• Claim: Microsoft is a monopoly
• Stated Reasons: Microsoft dominates the market,
stifles competition, and engages in predatory
pricing.
• Q: What’s the missing premise?
• Clue: The missing premise must use the two
terms that have been used only once already. (In
other words, the missing premise can’t use the
term “Microsoft.”)
Microsoft Case Laid Out as a Standard
Form Categorical Syllogism
MP: Any company that dominates the market,
stifles competition, and engages in
predatory pricing is a monopoly.
mp: Microsoft dominates the market, stifles
competition, and engages in predatory
pricing.
____________________________________
C: Microsoft is a monopoly.
Simple Categorical Argument Exercise
Argument: Harry is a British subject because he
was born in Bermuda.
MP:
mp: Because Harry was born in Bermuda.
___________________________________
C: Harry is a British subject.
MP: Anyone born in Bermuda is a British
subject.
Stephen Toulmin to the Rescue
•British Philosopher (1922-2009)
•Studied under Wittgenstein.
•Attempts to reconcile formal
logic and real world argument.
•Toulmin felt that “formal logic
has lost touch with its
application, perhaps because it
has falsified reality in the interest
of neatness and rigor” (Clauss 3).
•Logic is concerned with “the sort
of case we present in defense of
our claims” (Toulmin 7).
•“Logic is a generalized
jurisprudence” (7).
Standard Form vs. Toulmin Schema
Backing: Evidence or argument to
support the Warrant.
MP: Anyone born in Bermuda is a
British subject.
Mp: Harry was born in Bermuda.
__________________
C: Harry is a British subject.
Warrant: Anyone born in Bermuda is a
British subject.
Stated Reason: Harry was born in
Bermuda.
Grounds: Documents supporting the
Stated Reason.
Conditions of Rebuttal: e.g., Ways in
which Harry might have lost or
renounced his British citizenship.
___________________
Claim: Harry is a British subject.
Qualifier: Limits upon force of claim,
e.g., maybe, probably, etc.
From Category to Value
• To move “up” one stasis, from a Categorical
(or Definitional) argument to an Evaluation
argument, simply add a value adjective to the
Y term.
• Categorical: X is a Y.
• Evaluation: X is a good/bad Y.
Supply the Missing Warrant
Argument: Rider’s CBA is an excellent college
because it is an AACSB-accredited college.
Warrant:
Stated Reason: Because Rider’s CBA is an AACSB
accredited college.
_____________________________________
Claim: Rider’s CBA is an excellent college.
Warrant Supplied
Argument: Rider’s CBA is an excellent college
because it is an AACSB-accredited college.
Warrant: All AACSB-accredited colleges are
excellent colleges.
Stated Reason: Because Rider’s CBA is an AACSB
accredited college.
_____________________________________
Claim: Rider’s CBA is an excellent college.
Toulmin Schema Fleshed Out
Backing:
Warrant: All AACSB-accredited colleges are
excellent colleges.
Stated Reason: Because Rider’s CBA is an AACSB
-accredited college.
Grounds:
Conditions of Rebuttal:
_____________________________________
Claim: Rider’s CBA is an excellent college.
Qualifier:
Argument in Twelve Angry Men
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQ_nM5
NkQzs&feature=related
Toulmin Schema Analysis of an
Argument in Twelve Angry Men
Backing:
Warrant:
Stated Reason:
Grounds:
Conditions of Rebuttal:
Claim:
Qualifier:
Works Cited
Bergmann, Merrie, James Moor, and Jack Nelson. The Logic Book. 5th ed. McGraw-Hill
Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages, 2008. Print.
Fahnestock, Jeanne, and Marie Secor. “The Stases in Scientific and Literary Argument.”
Written Communication 5.4 (1988): 427-443. Print.
Fulkerson, Richard. Teaching the Argument in Writing. National Council of Teachers of
English, 1996. Print.
Lunsford, Andrea A., and John J. Ruszkiewicz. Everything's an Argument. Fifth Edition.
Bedford/St. Martin's, 2009. Print.
Osborne, Jonathan. “Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of Collaborative, Critical
Discourse.” Science 328.5977 (2010): 463-466. Web. 17 May 2010.
Pater, Walter. “The School of Giorgione.” The Renaissance - Studies in Art and Poetry; the
1893 text. Berkeley: UC Press, 1980. Print.
Ramage, John D., John C. Bean, and June Johnson. Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric with
Readings. 8th ed. Longman, 2009. Print.
Robinson, Marin et al. Write Like a Chemist: A Guide and Resource. 1st ed. Oxford
University Press, USA, 2008. Print.
Toulmin, Stephen Edelston. The Uses of Argument. Updated. Cambridge University Press,
2003. Print.