Theory Of Practice And Argumentation Final- Essay Questions

Front 1

What are the 4 parts on how to decide what claims to refute?

Back 1

1) Avoid unpersuasive refutation. Concede claims that are too hard to answer.
2) Avoid preaching to the choir. Refute claims that the people who don't already support your position might accept.
3) Avoid inconsistencies in your own arguments. Your language style should match your content.
4) Avoid proving your opponent's argument. Don't use grounds that better support the other side's claim.

Front 2

What are the 5 steps of problem/solution order and how to use them?

Back 2

1) Attention Step: Opening claim to get involvement.
2) Need Step: Identify something that needs correction.
3) Satisfaction: Show how that thing can be corrected.
4) Visualization: Show how the world will change after the condition is enacted.
5) Action: Tell how to put the proposal into effect. Ex- write Representatives and tell them to stop voting for bail-out packs.

Front 3

What are the 6 parts of patterns-in-use analysis for trial arguments?

Back 3

1) Making claims in complaints and answers based upon prior interviews and legal sources. (Speak to the people who were involved).
2) Finding support (Toulmin model) during pretrial discovery. Ex- Use interrogations, depositions, and legal research to get info.
3) Opening statements (trial begins). Summarize claims of facts, expected grounds, make into a story/trial narrative that turn into chains of claims.
4) Case: Each side presents its witnesses and physical evidence. Each side shows facts that weren't denied and contradictions stated.
5) Questioning and Objections: cross-examine witnesses to test credibility and use objections to show warrants to stand as grounds.
6) Closing arguments. Full trial narratives are summarized. More details abot evaluative judgment that the jury must make.

Front 4

What are 7 ways to bridge the liberal and conservative presumptions in political argument?

Back 4

1) Lesser of two evils. In a situation where you must act, show your idea is better.
2) Argument from waste. Emphasize to both sides the downfall/ waste. Ex- even if you have a really expensive health care plan, you will pay more, BUT it's fair b/c you are already wasting right now.
3) Argument from precedent. Always try to compare it to what we had in the past. Ex- past health care reforms have always preserved doctor-patient choice.
4) Arguing a new beginning. Create a new beginning by showing a scenario. Ex- Taking health care benefits equalizes for the first time those who are uninsured and those who have employer- provided health insurance.
5) Renewal of Commitment. Try to do what we should have done before. Ex- Need to return to the 1990s efforts to reform health care.
6) Emphasizing common beliefs. Get both sides to agree with different choices. Ex- everyone will have the opportunity to choose their primary care physician.
7) Creating a common enemy. Associate an unpopular group with a specific proposal. Ex- Politicians will say labor unions want to deny Americans helath care choice.

Front 5

What are 4 ways to use political argument to create difference?

Back 5

1) Separating appearance from reality. Argue that there is a difference between what the person says and what he or she does or really believes. Ex- show hypocracy and promote difference.
2) Claim or disclaim responsibility. Argue that you brought about something desirable or that your opponent was not responsible. Ex- Advisor says Obama did not propose taxing health care benefits, although someone else might have said that.
3) Make leadership a question of personal charcter. Argue over ascriptions of character. Ex- Is Obama flip-flopping on health care?
4) Say goodbye. Argue that you still care about a group of people, but that you will no longer commit yourself to do things for them politically. Ex- say good bye because the cost is too high to associate youself with a certain group/thing.

Front 6

What are the 5 elements of a brief?

Back 6

1) Identify the decision context. Who will decide, what will be decided and why?
2) Statement of the proposition. What action, value, or belief is asked for in this debate?
3) Statement of uncontroversial matter. Definitions of terms, shared criteria, admitted facts, and shared claims.
4) Statements of potential issues. Issues most likey to be central to the decision.
5) Statements of arguments and counterarguments. State claims you intend to support with arguments and possible opposing claims that might detract from them.

Front 7

What are 4 parts of patterns-in-use analysis for scientific argument?

Back 7

1) Claims are made factually. Make reservations to your claims, use consensually-validated procedures.
2) Hypotheses are retested in the search for truth. Arguments are made in peer review forums.
3) Theories that predict testable results are composed.The goal is to produce a theory. Reconcile theory with evidence.
4) Presumption lies in favor of existing theory. Data must be accumulated before theory is changed.

Front 8

What are the 6 parts of formal pattern analysis for critical arguments in philosophy and the arts?

Back 8

1) Grounds are usually judgments about whether a particular things, services, or performances conform to a particular standard of value. Ex- Did Star Trek accomplish what it needed to? Critics complimented it.
2) Grounds are interpretations of things, services, or performances produced and norms or standards governing the activity of production. Ex- The action sequences were amazing and the characters are very identifiable.
3) Warrants are reasons to believe that the norms or standards of evaluation have been properly applied to these things, services, or performances. Ex- Due to the good job done on the movie, it gives Parmount Pictures the opportunity to expand on the Star Trek sequence.
4) Backing involves reasons to believe that the things, services or performances have been properly interpreted and that the appropriate norms and standards have been selected. Ex- The movie turns out good if it can stay simple and allow people to pick up on Star Trek language and phrases.
5) Qualifiers are statements about the limitations of the act of critical judgment. Ex- Critic says that J.J. Abrams attempt was "mostly" successful but the Star Trek theme music is only heard at the end.
6) Rebuttals and Reservations involve alternative interpretations, standards, and critical judgments. Ex- rebuttal is that the music has always been a central theme. Reservation is "one slightly disappointing" thing was the music.