Elements Of Aruguments - Writing For Lawyers

Front 1

Comparison

Back 1

emphasizes likenesses

Front 2

Contract

Back 2

emphasizes differences

Front 3

ARGUMENTATIVE STRATEGY

Back 3

used to defend, refute claims

Front 4

COMPARISON - device for claims of value

Back 4

- argue 1 thing better/worse than other

Front 5

Comparison/Contrast Essays

Back 5

Compares two things belonging to the same general class (significant characteristics ->same magnitude

Front 6

Length ->methods for developing definition

Back 6

(personal narrative, examples, stipulation, comparison, contrast, cause-and-effect analysis, cultural context, personal history, values, behavior)

Front 7

Negation

Back 7

what term is NOT (negative definition) - then must define what term is

Front 8

METHODS FOR DEFINING TERMS (pg 116-120)

Back 8

(CAN USE ALL IN AN ESSAY)

(DSNEE) Dictionary Definition. Stipulation, Negation, Examples, Extended Definition

Front 9

Dictionary Definition

Back 9

simplest (pg 116)
May be too narrow, too broad

Front 10

Stipulation (pg 116)

Back 10

accept definition different from conventional
- limits or control argument

Front 11

Examples

Back 11

most effective (method for defining terms)real/hypothetical

Front 12

Extended Definition

Back 12

Length ->methods for developing definition (personal narrative, examples, stipulation, comparison, contrast, cause-and-effect analysis, cultural context, personal history, values, behavior)

Front 13

Defining Vague and Ambiguous Terms (pg 114)

Arguments of value and policy

Back 13

-> abstract terms require clarification (freedom, justice, patriotism, equality, free speech, family, success)

Front 14

DEFINING THE TERMS IN YOUR ARGUMENT
ARGUMENTS (CONTROVERSIAL QUESTIONS)

Back 14

->TURN TO ARGUMENTS ABOUT DEFINITION OF TERMS

Front 15

2 PURPOSES OF DEFINITION

Back 15

Clarify -> vague/ambiguous terms, Method ->develop whole essay

Front 16

Judgments

Back 16

create Definitions

Front 17

Definitions

Back 17

influence Judgments
->change nature of event or a “fact”

Front 18

DEFINING THE TERMS IN YOUR ARGUMENT
ARGUMENTS (CONTROVERSIAL QUESTIONS)

Back 18

->TURN TO ARGUMENTS ABOUT DEFINITION OF TERMS

Front 19

Credibility
***most important element in arguer’s ability is....

Back 19

->to persuade audience

Front 20

How do you provide credibility?

Back 20

1) submit good evidence
2) thoughtful/judicious tone ->fair in conclusion
3) clean, literate, well-organized paper àevidence of care in writing/proofreading

Front 21

The Audience (pg 13)
does what?

Back 21

* All arguments ->audience in mind

Front 22

The Warrant (pg 11) does what?

Back 22

(**underlie all claims!!)
MORE GENERAL STATEMENT THAN THE CLAIM!

Front 23

Warrant -> what kind of assumption?

Back 23

inference/assumption, belief or principle ->taken for granted
->guarantee of reliability, soundness (relationship/claim)
->stated, unstated

Front 24

If second speaker accepts evidence they also have to accept what?

Back 24

Also has to accept warrant - evidence cannot support claim if authors not credible

Front 25

give example of claim, support and warrant

Back 25

CLAIM: veg diet ->longer life
SUPPORT: author of xxx say so
WARRANT: authors of xx reliable, experts of subject

Front 26

give example of claim, support and warrant

Back 26

CLAIM: marijuana law illegal repeal it
SUPPORT: people right to choose
WARRANT: no law should prevent rights

Front 27

The Support (pg 11)
Support -
Materials Materials -> (EA), Evidence, Motivational appeals

Back 27

->by arguer ->convince audience ->claim sound

Front 28

Evidence (data) -> (FST)

Back 28

facts, statistics, testimony

Front 29

Motivational appeals ->

Back 29

to values/attitudes of audience ->win support -> claim
(hint: offer stats, appeal to individual generosity)

Front 30

CLAIM (proposition) - What are you trying to prove? (page 10)

Back 30

v

Front 31

What are Claims of Fact?

Back 31

(support by data (true, inference, educated guess))
Condition -> existed, exists, will exist

Front 32

What are Facts or data?

Back 32

-> audience will accept -> objectively verifiable
Ex - epidemic not unique, racing dangerous support, weather getting colder

Claims of Value (approve/disapprove)
Attempt to prove -> things more desirable than others
Ex - opera good listening, football dehumanizing, ending a patients life

Front 33

What are Claims of Policy?

Back 33

(***analysis ->both fact/value)
Policies ->solutions to problems
**** (expression should, must, ought in statement)
Ex - prisons should be abolished because…, establish policies to bring…., women should appear…

Front 34

What are the ARGUMENT parts

Back 34

-> (CSW) Claim, Support, Warrant

Front 35

What are? The Terms of Argument (pg 9)

Back 35

Argument ->importance to logical appeals
>difference ->emphasis
Persuasion -> element of ethical, emotional appeals

Acceptance ->based on logical, emotional appeals

Front 36

What is the (BASIS OF DEMOCRATIC ORDER)!!!!!!

Back 36

Argument à Civilizing Influence

Front 37

Why Study Argument?
Rules

Back 37

__>define terms, evaluate evidence, Arrive Conclusions cross disciplinary lines
Provides Tools àDistinguish (true/false, Valid, invalid, claims)

Front 38

Chapter 1 - Understanding Argument
Nature of Argument
Argumentation (IRA), what are the reasons to argue?

Back 38

Influence others w/Reasoned discourse àmake them Act as we wish (pg 4)

Front 39

What is Language responsible -> shaping attitudes & feelings ?

Back 39

-> emotive language
(expresses/arouses emotions)

Front 40

Connotation

Back 40

meanings we attach to a word apart from its explicit definition

Front 41

Euphemism

Back 41

polite substitute word for an item

Front 42

SLANTING

Back 42

-> interpreting or presenting in line with a special interest (almost always negative)

Front 43

Abstract

Back 43

->qualities apart from particular things and events (beauty in the eye of the beholder) (honesty)
WRITING A STORY (enhance by details, examples and anecdotes)(tell what conclusions we have arrived at; details tell us how we got there)
)(common problem is omision of details)

Front 44

Concrete

Back 44

- real objects & experiences (beautiful roses)(returning money to owner)
ARGUMENTS

Front 45

Arguments

Back 45

- use concrete and extensive abstractions

Front 46

Abstractions ->arguments of value & policy are important why?

Back 46

1) represent qualities, characteristics, and values that the writer is explaining, defending or attacking
2) enable writer to make generalizations about his or her data

Front 47

SHORT CUTS

Back 47

->arguments ->depend on readers’ responses to words
-.emotive language
-often mistaken for valid argument
(cliches/slogans)

Front 48

CLICHES

Back 48

->expression/idea stale->overused

Front 49

Cliches of thought -

Back 49

conventional rule or method for doing something (applied or repeated without thought) )Ex- GENERATION X

Front 50

Mass language - ready -made answers, stereotyped solutions response reader expected without giving him a reason for response

Back 50

ready -made answers, stereotyped solutions response reader expected without giving him a reason for response

Front 51

Shortcomings of slogans (3)

Back 51

1) brevity ->disadvantages (ignores exception/negative instance) in absolute terms without describing circumstances
2) conceal unexamined warrants. (made in America -> warrants unconvincing - better economy, better goods, jobs)
3) how to achieve objectives

Front 52

3 types of legal reasoning

Back 52

deductive, inductive, reasoning by analogy

Front 53

Syllogism

Back 53

term that describes a particular logical relationship between two arguments (basic form is deductive)

Front 54

Syllogism consists of what 3 parts

Back 54

major premise (broad), minor premise (narrower), conclusion

Front 55

Deductive brings conclusion how?

Back 55

Major premise & minor premise worded so naturally bring conclusion

Front 56

Deductive is also called what and how does it work?

Back 56

transitivity (If 2 different things equal to same thing then also equal to each other)

Front 57

legal syllogisms(deductive) and inductive are not based on what?

Back 57

Not based on absolute truths

Front 58

Inductive works to conclusion how?

Back 58

by asserting a series of minor premises to support the conclusion, a major premise (underlies much of case analysis)