Identification, Reconstruction and Evaluation of Arguments Outline ● Identification ○ fillers vs. claims ○ relations between claims ● Reconstruction ○ basic types of premises ○ Toulmin scheme ● Evaluation ○ ten rules for proper argumentation Paraphrasing #1 Expressing the same content in other words ● “Educate yourself, educate yourself, educate yourself.” ● “I did not have moments of intimacy with that lady.” ● http://paraphrasing-tool.com/ #2 Grasping the important content ● get rid of redundancies ● express the important content ● not necessary stated in other words What is not important? Our movement is about replacing a failed and corrupt political establishment with a new government controlled by you, the American people. The establishment has trillions of dollars at stake in this election. For those who control the levers of power in Washington and for the global special interests, they partner with these people that don’t have your good in mind. The political establishment that is trying to stop us is the same group responsible for our disastrous trade deals, massive illegal immigration and economic and foreign policies that have bled our country dry. The political establishment has brought about the destruction of our factories and our jobs as they flee to Mexico, China and other countries all around the world. It’s a global power structure that is responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class, stripped our country of its wealth and put that money into the pockets of a handful of large corporations and political entities. The only thing that can stop this corrupt machine is you. The only force strong enough to save our country is us. The only people brave enough to vote out this corrupt establishment is you, the American people. I’m doing this for the people and the movement and we will take back this country for you and we will make America great again. I’m Donald Trump and I approve this message. Simple taxonomy of fillers 1. Framing ○ Who? Where? When? 2. Background ○ Why? Why now? What else should we know? 3. Repetitions ○ repetitions, repetitions 4. Illustrations, examples 5. Language nuances ○ definitions, etymology, sarcasm, rhetorical ornaments 6. Details ○ everything else Fillers? Our movement is about replacing a failed and corrupt political establishment with a new government controlled by you, the American people. [background] The establishment has trillions of dollars at stake in this election. [detail] For those who control the levers of power in Washington and for the global special interests, they partner with these people that don’t have your good in mind. The political establishment that is trying to stop us is the same group responsible for our disastrous trade deals, massive illegal immigration and economic and foreign policies that have bled our country dry. [repetition] The political establishment has brought about the destruction of our factories and our jobs as they flee to Mexico, China and other countries all around the world. [illustration] It’s a global power structure that is responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class, stripped our country of its wealth and put that money into the pockets of a handful of large corporations and political entities. [repetition] The only thing that can stop this corrupt machine is you. The only force strong enough to save our country is us. The only people brave enough to vote out this corrupt establishment is you, the American people. [repetition] I’m doing this for the people and the movement and we will take back this country for you and we will make America great again. I’m Donald Trump and I approve this message. [framing] Relations between claims 1. Motive ○ They detonated dynamite because it was expired. 2. Cause ○ Dynamite detonated because there was a fire. 3. Effect ○ Dynamite detonated and killed a goat. 4. Clarification ○ Dynamite detonated and the explosion was huge. 5. Backing ○ Dynamite detonated spontaneously because there was nobody around. 6. Implication ○ Dynamite detonated spontaneously so it must have been unstable. Barebone paraphrase It’s a global power structure that is responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class. [motive] For those who control the levers of power in Washington and for the global special interests, they partner with these people that don’t have your good in mind. [clarification] The only thing that can stop this corrupt machine is you. [implication] I’m doing this for the people and the movement and we will take back this country for you and we will make America great again. Current politicians do not care about working class because they care more about their own good and global interests. You can change it, therefore vote for Donald Trump. Argumentative reconstruction ● argumentative support: a claim (conclusion) is made more acceptable due to its relation to other claims (premises) ● focus on backing and implication, they implement a basic structure of an argument: Backing 1. There was nobody around. 2. Therefore dynamite detonated spontaneously. Implication 1. Dynamite detonated spontaneously. 2. Therefore it must have been unstable. Types of premises (P1) There was nobody around. (C) Therefore dynamite detonated spontaneously. (P1) There was nobody around. (P2) It is impossible to blow it off remotely. (C) Therefore dynamite detonated spontaneously. (P1) There was nobody around. (P2) We had no intention to destroy that ammunition store. (C) Therefore dynamite detonated spontaneously. Stability of argument (P1) There was nobody around. (P2) It is impossible to blow it off remotely. (C) Therefore dynamite detonated spontaneously. (P1) There was nobody around. (P2) We had no intention to destroy that store. (C) Therefore dynamite detonated spontaneously. There was nobody around. It is impossible to blow it off remotely. Dynamite detonated spontaneously. There was nobody around. We had no intention to destroy that store. Dynamite detonated spontaneously. Be careful! Positive argument “Czech Postal Service is perfect. They deliver on time, it is cheap and employees are always nice.” Negative argument “Czech Postal Service is not perfect. They do not deliver on time, it is not cheap and employees are not always nice.” Toulmin model data therefore claim since warrant Textbook example Harry was born in Bermuda presumably Harry is a British subject since a man born in Bermuda will generally be a British subject Dynamite example there was nobody around dynamite detonated spontaneously since it is impossible to detonate dynamite remotely Dynamite example there was nobody around dynamite detonated spontaneously since it is impossible to detonate dynamite remotely parallel argument not true not true not relevant not sufficient Evaluation of arguments ● We are surprisingly good at it, especially when it comes to arguments of others. ● Proper evaluation presupposes adequate ○ identification of intention of the partner ■ Is he really arguing? Or is it some other kind of verbal activity? ○ interpretation of argumentative structure ■ Is this relevant? Is there a support relation? ○ recognition of target of attack ■ What just happened? Is the objection working? #1 Pravidlo svobody Strany si nesmějí bránit v předkládání stanovisek a v jejich zpochybňování. A. Omezení stanovisek či pochyb a. Tabuizace B. Omezení argumentační svobody a. Výhrůžky (ad baculum) b. Důraz na emoce (ad misericordiam) c. Osobní útok (ad hominem) #1 Pravidlo svobody Strany si nesmějí bránit v předkládání stanovisek a v jejich zpochybňování. 1. Neměl bys říkat, že babička se neměla znovu vdávat. O mrtvých jen dobře. 2. Neměli byste se nechat ovlivnit faktem, že jsem předsedou oborové rady, která rozhoduje o vašem dalším studiu. 3. Byls ve straně? Byl. Tak mi neříkej, jak mám řídit auto! 4. In her campaign for president, Hillary Clinton has received $100 million in contributions from Wall Street and hedge funds, says Trump. 5. Chris Stevens was left helpless to die as Hillary Clinton soundly slept in her bed ... who knows if she was sleeping … she might have been sleeping. #2 Pravidlo důkazního břemene Strana předkládající stanovisko se zavazuje toto stanovisko bránit, pokud o to bude požádána. A. Přenesení důkazního břemene na kritika B. Vyhýbání se důkaznímu břemeni a. Imunizace stanoviska #2 Pravidlo důkazního břemene Strana předkládající stanovisko se zavazuje toto stanovisko bránit, pokud o to bude požádána. 1. Nejdřív dokaž, že to tak není! 2. Je naprosto zřejmé, že školné musí být zavedeno. 3. Doktorští studenti jsou esenciálně nepraktičtí flákači. 4. America is Judeo-Christian nation because that’s the way it is. Clinton would flood the country with terrorists. 5. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best... They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people. #3 Pravidlo útoku Útok na stanovisko se musí vztahovat ke stanovisku, které bylo protistranou skutečně předloženo. A. Dezinterpretace stanoviska a. Zveličení, zjednodušení, vytržení z kontextu B. Připsání fiktivního stanoviska protistraně a. Vytváření fiktivního protivníka #3 Pravidlo útoku Útok na stanovisko se musí vztahovat ke stanovisku, které bylo protistranou skutečně předloženo. 1. Já se osobně domnívám, že demokratické hodnoty musí být hájeny. 2. V poslední době se hodně lidí domnívá, že Masaryk byl ve skutečnosti žena. 3. Clinton wants to have open borders. 4. She wants to take your guns away. #4 Pravidlo obrany Strana smí bránit stanovisko pouze pomocí argumentu, jenž se k tomuto stanovisku vztahuje. A. Nerelevantní argumentace a. Ignoratio elenchi B. Neargumentování a. Znežití patosu b. Zneužití autority (ad verecundiam) #4 Pravidlo obrany Strana smí bránit stanovisko pouze pomocí argumentu, jenž se k tomuto stanovisku vztahuje. 1. Brzy ze mě bude doktor, tu ženu vyléčím! 2. The speech was a poignant speech that was well received by the American people, he said. The words that she used were words that were personal to her. Therefore she did not plagiarise them. 3. Trump also has claimed repeatedly that Putin had called him a “genius.” Russian language experts told us in May that Putin used a word meaning “colorful” or “bright,” depending on the translation. Putin clarified in June that he called Trump “flamboyant.” #5 Pravidlo nevyjádřené premisy Strana nesmí klamně předkládat jako premisu něco, co bylo druhou stranou nevyjádřeno, rovněž nesmí odmítat vlastní implicitní premisu. A. Zveličení premisy B. Popření vlastní nevyjádřené premisy #5 Pravidlo nevyjádřené premisy Strana nesmí klamně předkládat jako premisu něco, co bylo druhou stranou nevyjádřeno, rovněž nesmí odmítat vlastní implicitní premisu. 1. I have nothing against homosexuals. Only, I think the age limit for homosexual relations should be higher, so we can avoid the danger that all young people become homosexuals. 2. Hillary Clinton’s energy agenda will cost the U.S. economy over $5 trillion. #6 Pravidlo východiska Strana nesmí klamně předkládat premisu jako přijaté východisko, nebo popírat premisu vyjadřující přijaté východisko. A. Faul mnoha otázek B. Kruhová argumentace #6 Pravidlo východiska Strana nesmí klamně předkládat premisu jako přijaté východisko, nebo popírat premisu vyjadřující přijaté východisko. 1. S kým ses pohádal dnes? 2. Rasová diskriminace je trestná, protože jde o porušení zákona. #7 Pravidlo schématu Stanovisko nelze považovat za úspěšně obhájené, pakliže obhajoba patřičným způsobem nepoužila vhodné argumentační schéma. A. Chybná varianta schématu a. Ad populum b. Ad consequentiam B. Špatné použité schéma a. Unáhlené zobecnění b. Post hoc ergo propter hoc c. Falešná analogie #7 Pravidlo schématu Stanovisko nelze považovat za úspěšně obhájené, pakliže obhajoba patřičným způsobem nepoužila vhodné argumentační schéma. 1. You (Hillary Clinton) get a subpoena, and after getting the subpoena you delete 33,000 emails. #8 Pravidlo validity Argument musí být validní, případně musí být validní po doplnění jedné či více nevyjádřených premis. A. Záměna nutné a dostatečné podmínky B. Chyby skládání #8 Pravidlo validity Argument musí být validní, případně musí být validní po doplnění jedné či více nevyjádřených premis. 1. Pokud sníš zkaženou rybu, budeš oranžový. Jsi oražový. Tudíž jsi musel sníst zkaženou rybu. 2. Pokud sníš zkaženou rybu, budeš oranžový. Nesnědl jsi zkaženou rybu. Tudíž nejsi oranžový. #9 Pravidlo ukončení Neúspěšná obrana stanoviska musí vést ke stažení stanoviska předkladatelem; úspěšná obhajoba stanoviska musí vést ke stažení pochyb protivníkem. A. Ad ignorantiam #10 Pravidlo jasnosti Strana nesmí používat nejasné formulace a musí interpretovat vyjádření protistrany co nejpřesněji. A. Zneužití nejasnosti a. Nevyjádřenost b. Víceznačnost c. Neznalost d. Vágnost #10 Pravidlo jasnosti Strana nesmí používat nejasné formulace a musí interpretovat vyjádření protistrany co nejpřesněji. Well, first of all, I want you to understand that the Democrats, and I’ve watched them very intensely, even though it’s a very, very boring thing to watch, that the Democrats are doing nothing with Social Security. They’re leaving it the way it is. In fact, they want to increase it. They want to actually give more. And that’s what we’re up against. And whether we like it or not, that is what we’re up against. I will do everything within my power not to touch Social Security, to leave it the way it is; to make this country rich again; to bring back our jobs; to get rid of deficits; to get rid of waste, fraud and abuse, which is rampant in this country, rampant, totally rampant.