Chapter seven is about the different ways of constructing arguments."The key to Rogerian argumentation is a willingness to think about opposing positions and to describe them fairly"(177). The Rogerian argument is about having a full understanding of the subject you wish to talk about and looking and explaining it from different point of views to make an argument. It's important to go in depth with the subject to get a deep understanding. How would you know what's best if you don't know everything about it? This provides ethos for the readers it lets them know you know exactly what you're talking about. It may be kind of challenging to write about the pros and cons from each point of view, yet, explaining how your point is better than all of the ones you've listed. It's better to compromise and build a common ground with the reader to strive for solutions that can benefit everyone. In my opinion, I think this would be more difficult, especially if you're very opinionated.
Another argument mentioned is the Toulmin argument, which is about having a clear understanding of a subject but worrying less about the readers reaction, whether they agree or disagree it's about justifying your ideas.
Toulmin Argument Outline:
-claim (what's being argued)
-qualifier (limit the strength of the argument)
-good reasons
-warrant (logical statement connecting the claim and data)
-backing (prove the warrant is true by the use of evidence which also leads to authority)
-rebuttals (counter-arguments, as if the argument isn't true)
For our next project I plan on writing about Marijuana,
here is my quick Toulmin argument outline:
claim: Legalization of Marijuana in the United States (Pro Legalization)
reason: Marijuana is harmless
warrant: since it relieves the pain of cancer patients and is less risky/addictive than the use of alcohol, tobacco, and other nonprescription drugs.
backing: It has been made legal in certain states for medical purposes and proves to help relieve pain and stimulate appetite. If the United States can legalize other drugs and the use of alcohol surely they should legalize marijuana, it's one of the safest drugs out there. It can benefit us medically and economically, it can also improve society.
rebuttals: Marijuana is a hallucinogen and has THC in it. It is an illegal substance that no one should use.
qualifier: Marijuana is harmless SO it should be legalized.
authority: U.S. Government
things to consider as you move forward with WP2
ReplyDeleteyour warrant is twofold: a) it relieves the pain of cancer patients and b) it is less risky/addictive than the use of alcohol, tobacco, and other nonprescription drugs. questions (rebuttal?) related to part a: 1) is there not already a prescription medication that can aid cancer patients? 2) opium and morphine are two addictive, hallucinogenic drugs that have been put into pharmaceutical use. what makes the use of marijuana different from them? questions (rebuttal?) related to part b: 1) what are other nonprescription, legal substances that are hallucinogens? 2) what is "harmless," "safe"? 3) the idea that marijuana can improve society is a pretty sweeping, even utopic statement.
In response to Stephanie's blog post about Chapter 7: Structuring Arguments, I think she did a good job summarizing and understanding the ideas of the chapter. She discussed the two different types of arguments; Rogerian and Toulmin. For the Rogerian argument, she explained that you need to go in depth with your claims and ideas to help the reader fully understand your argument and not have any questions or confusion regarding the argument, which I agree with. She gave the outline of the Toulmin argument in an organized format which was helpful for me to understand. I could not see the picture she added into her blog post though but I can assume it was related to her summary above of the different arguments. I liked her argument idea for WP2 about marijuana. I liked that she outlined the claims, reasoning, warrant, backing, rebuttals and qualifiers just like she did for the outline of the Toulmin argument above. It seems like she has a good idea of what she wants to do for her WP2 project. I cannot tell though if this is her personal opinion about the legalization of marijuana or just what she chose to write about because it was easiest for her since she is knowledgeable of those claims and she wanted to write about this specific definitional argument. Either way, it seems like she has a good outline of her project and that she will be able to go in depth with her supporting claims and I look forward to reading her finished project.
ReplyDelete