Analyzing ArgumentsAnalyzing Arguments

What is an argument?What is an argument?• “the claims that people make when

they are asserting their opinions and/or supporting their beliefs.” (Hollihan and Baaske)

• “. . . putting forth a claim, evidence, and reasoning.” (Verlinden)

Other definitions:Other definitions:• Reason: “a statement intended to

establish a claim.” (Herrick)• Conclusion: “a statement

accompanied by supporting reasons.” (Herrick)

• Claim: “a statement that does not stand alone without further proof, a conclusion the audience will not accept without verification.”(Rybacki)

Decision makingDecision making• Intrapersonal-rational arguments

with ourselves.• Interpersonal-rational arguments

with others.• Group-rational arguments used

within a team setting.

Reasons we make Reasons we make argumentsarguments

• To justify our position on a topic.

• To seek to persuade someone.

• As a means of discovery, inquiry, and education.

The Narrative paradigmThe Narrative paradigm• Developed by Walter Fisher• Main premise is that “people

reason through narratives”• Fisher believes that “people are

essentially storytellers.”• We make decisions on the basis of

“good reasons.”

More:More:• History, biography, culture, and

character determine what we consider good reasons.

• Narrative rationality is determined by the coherence and fidelity of our stories.

• The world is a set of stories from which we choose, and thus constantly re-create our lives.

SummarySummary• People come to understand their

world and their values through narratives.

• We will seek out stories that fit our interests and disregard those that don’t make sense to us.

• If the story holds together (cohesive) we accept it as reality.

Arguer Orientations:Arguer Orientations:• Wayne Brockriede

published an article in the 1970’s called “Arguers as lovers”.

• He proposed that arguer orientations can be framed as “rapist”, “seducer”, or “lovers”.

The arguer as “Rapist”The arguer as “Rapist”• Depersonalizes the other.• Relies on verbal aggressiveness.

(name calling, ad hominems, etc . . )• Uses force, authority, sanctions.• Employs threats, ultimatums.• An example: poor litigants vs. large

corporations.

The Arguer as “Seducer”The Arguer as “Seducer”• Relies on harm, beguilement,

trickery.• Creates an illusion of choice.• Utilizes ingratiation strategies.• Resorts to deception.• Employs illicit reasoning (false

reasoning, withholding evidence, etc.)

““Rapists” and “Seducers” as Rapists” and “Seducers” as ArguersArguers• Displays disregard for the other person.• Views other as an “object” or “target”

rather than as a person.• Emphasizes success, de-emphasizes

relationships.• Unwilling to expose oneself to the risk of

change.• Adopts only one perspective on a issue—

one’s own.

Arguers as “Lovers”Arguers as “Lovers”• Regards other as an equal, stresses power

parity.• Values the relationship as much as (if not

more than) the outcome of decision.• Emphasizes cooperation and

collaboration over competition.• Values shared decision making, choice

making.• Willing to risk values, knowledge, and self-

esteem by engaging in argument.

Conclusions:Conclusions:• The categories aren’t mutually

exclusive, they are a matter of degree.

• The categories are situational and contextual.

• A person can change his or her orientation to arguing.