Toulmin Analysis of Arguments

 

One important point to remember about the Toulmin analysis is that it does not always follow logically; rather, it reflects how people think. Therefore, there are not always exact answers— especially when it comes to warrants. Warrants may vary among different audience members.

 

Claim

Thesis, main point, proposition, conclusion

 

Support

Evidence (proof, data, or reasons) to support the claim

 

Warrants

Unstated assumptions, presuppositions, unstated premises, generally accepted truths What is it that bridges the claim and support? How did you get there? There might be several warrants, and they may be stated in various ways.

C = Claim S = Support

W = Warrant

 

C: It will rain today.

S: The meteorologist stated it would.

W: The meteorologist is able to predict the weather.

 

C: It will rain today.

S: My grandmother’s knee aches.

W: When her knee aches, it will rain. Her knee is able to predict the weather.

 

C: The president of the United States is doing a poor job.

S: The unemployment rate is the highest it has been in ten years.

W: The president is responsible for creating jobs. When unemployment is high, it is a sign that the president is failing.

 

C: This school needs to dedicate more money to parking.

S: There are never enough parking spaces for students and faculty. W: Money will create more parking spaces for students and faculty.

 

Backing

Cultural values and beliefs, along with additional evidence, that strengthen the warrants and make the audience more likely to accept them.

 

For example, an audience may be unwilling to believe a warrant that the meteorologist is

 

able to predict the weather accurately. Backing for that warrant could include the statement that the meteorologist has cutting-edge technology, has been accurate before, and most people have faith in the accuracy of these predictions because they are usually correct. The audience may be even more unwilling to believe that my grandmother’s knee is a predictor of weather. In that case, I will certainly need backing to support my warrant. I might state that nine out of ten times her knee indicates when it will rain. She has a condition that is proven to present itself when the weather changes.

 

Qualifiers

Words that assert probabilities rather than certainties Absolutes –> qualifiers

Always, never –> sometimes Is, are –> maybe or might All –> many or some

None –> few

Absolutely –> probably or possibly

 

Rebuttals

Arguments that establish what is wrong, invalid, or unacceptable with a claim Rebuttals are found in the argument itself and are not your response to the argument

 

B = Backing C = Claim

Q = Qualifier R = Rebuttal

S = Support W = Warrant

 

 

S                                                                                   Q                     C

The meteorologist said it will rain——————————-> So, presumably, it will rain.

/                       \

Since W         Unless R

/                                   \

The meteorologist is able                The weather changes rapidly. There is to predict the weather                                              a miscalculation.

/

On account of B

/

S/he has done so before, has access to cutting-edge technology, and so on.

 

Toulmin—Warrants

 

Practice with Warrants: Choose the best warrant.

 

Keep in mind that there may be other ways of stating the warrant, so be sure to choose the one that best connects the support to the claim or that answers the question “How did you get there?”

 

 

Claim of Fact

C: Candidate Smith does not value human life. S: Candidate Smith is pro abortion.

W: Candidate Smith has had an abortion

Someone who values life would not support abortion. Candidate Smith supports the death penalty.

 

Claim of Policy

C: Classes should be canceled on Martin Luther King Day. S: He was a civil rights leader who was assassinated.

W: Civil rights leaders are assassinated.  Assassinated people deserve holidays in their names.

Classes should be canceled for assassinated civil rights leaders.

 

Claim of Value

C: American Beauty is a good movie.

S: It won the Academy Award for best picture in 1999. W: 1999 was a good year for movies.

Annette Benning should have won best actress. Good movies win the Academy Award.

 

Claim of Definition

C: Good students study frequently, never turn work in late, and answer questions in class. S: Three out of five professors agree that this is true.

W: Three out of five professors provide enough evidence to determine the qualities of good students.

You should be a good student.

If you don’t answer questions in class, you are not a good student.

 

Claim of Cause

C: Pollution harms the ozone layer.

S: Scientists have determined this to be the case. W: We should stop using hair spray.

Scientists are able to determine what harms the ozone layer and are trustworthy. Harming the ozone layer is bad.