THE TOULMIN MODEL OF ARGUMENTATION

TOULMIN MODEL OF ARGUMENTATION
(www.willamette.edu/cla/rhetoric/courses/argumentation/toulmin.httm)
Claim: This is the main point, the thesis, the controlling idea. The claim
may be directly stated (usually at the first of a text, but sometimes at
the end, especially for effect) or the claim may be implied. You can find
the claim by asking the question, "What is the author trying to prove?"
Support: These are the reasons given in support of the claim; they are
also known as evidence, proof, data, arguments, or grounds. The
support of a claim can come in the form of facts and statistics, expert
opinions, examples, explanations, and logical reasoning. You can find
the support by asking, "What does the author say to persuade the
reader of the claim?"
Warrants: These are the assumptions or presuppositions underlying
the argument. Warrants are generally accepted beliefs and values,
common ways our culture or society views things; because they are so
commonplace, warrants are almost always unstated and implied. The
author and audience may either share these beliefs, or the author’s
warrants may be in conflict with audience’s generally held beliefs and
cultural norms and values. Warrants are important because they are the
"common ground" of author and audience; shared warrants invite the
audience to participate by unconsciously supplying part of the
argument. Warrants are also important because they provide the
underlying reasons linking the claim and the support. You can infer the
warrants by asking, "What’s causing the author to say the things s/he
does?" or "Where’s the author coming from?"
Claim Support
Universities should reinstate Affirmative action provides
affirmative action admissions equal access to education
policies. for all ethnic groups.
Warrant
Equality of access is a
basic American value.
In this example, the claim that universities should reinstate affirmative
action polices is supported by the reason that affirmative action
provides equal access for all ethnic groups. It’s generally acknowledged
by most Americans that equality of access is a basic American value.
There are three additional parts to Toulmin’s model of argument. Not
every one of these is used in every argument, but only as need arises.
Qualifiers: Because argument is about probability and possibility, not
about certainty, you should not use superlatives like all, every,
absolutely or never, none, no one. Instead you may need to qualify
(tone down) your claim with expressions like many, many times, some
or rarely, few, possibly.
Rebuttal: When making an argument, you must take into consideration
other conflicting viewpoints and deal with them fairly. You need to
answer questions and objections raised in the minds of the audience; if
you fail to do so, your own argument will be weakened and subject to
attack and counter-argument. Sometimes rebuttal will be directed to
opposing claims; other times rebuttal will be directed at alternative
interpretations of evidence or new evidence.
Backing: Sometimes the warrant itself needs evidence to support it, to
make it more believable, to further "back up" the argument.
These additional elements of argument may be added to our visual
representation as follows:
Qualifier: If a university does not have a diverse student body
Claim: ...it should use affirmative action admissions policies.
Support: Affirmative action policies provide equal access to education
for all ethnic groups.
Warrant: Equality of access is a basic American value.
Backing: Equality before the law is a fundamental right of all
Americans.
Rebuttal: Affirmative action policies do not result in "reverse
discrimination" because they are only part of a process that attempts to
ensure fairness in college admissions.
Five Categories of Claims
Argumentative essays are based on a claim, which almost always falls
into one of the five following categories.
1. Claims of fact. Is it real? Is it a fact? Did it really happen? Is it true?
Does it exist?
Examples: Global warming is occurring. Women are just as effective as
men in combat. Affirmative action undermines individual achievement.
Immigrants are taking away jobs from Americans who need work.
2. Claims of definition. What is it? What is it like? How should it be
classified? How can it be defined? How do we interpret it? Does its
meaning shift in particular contexts?
Examples: Alcoholism is a disease, not a vice. We need to define the
term family before we can talk about family values. Date rape is a
violent crime. The death penalty constitutes "cruel and unusual
punishment."
3. Claims of cause. How did this happen? What caused it? What led
up to this? What are its effects? What will this produce?
Examples: The introduction of the computer into university writing
classes has enhanced student writing ability. The popularity of the
Internet has led to a rise in plagiarism amongst students. The economic
boom of the 1990s was due in large part to the skillful leadership of the
4. Claims of value. Is it good or bad? Beneficial or harmful? Moral or
immoral? Who says so? What do these people value? What value
system will be used to judge?
Examples: Doctor-assisted suicide is immoral. Violent computer games
are detrimental to children’s social development. The Simpsons is not a
bad show for young people to watch. Dancing is good, clean fun.
5. Claims of policy. What should we do? How are we to act? What
policy should we take? What course of action should we take to solve
this problem?
Examples: We should spend less on the prison systems and more on
early intervention programs. Welfare programs should not be
dismantled. The state of Oklahoma ought to begin to issue vouchers for
parents to use to fund their children’s education. Every person in the
United States should have access to federally-funded health insurance.
Adapted from Nancy Wood’s Perspectives on Argument, 2nd ed. (pp.161-172)
Just about any given topic can lend itself to be stated as one of the five
types of claims. For example, the topic of gun control could be
approached from any of the five different types of claims:
Claim of Fact: There are serious restrictions on our Constitutional right
to bear arms. (This essay will give facts, examples, and statistics
relating to laws and policies that restrict the sale and use of firearms.)
Claim of Definition: Laws governing the sale of firearms such as
assault weapons and handguns do not constitute an infringement on
our right to bear arms. (This essay will focus on the Bill of Rights and its
clause about the right to bear arms. It will argue for a particular
definition that excludes the writing of laws that relate to ownership of
firearms.)
Claim of Cause: Tougher laws governing the sale of handguns would
mean a decrease in the number of homicides each year.