Difference Between Argument And Persuasion
I. The Method
In our everyday lives persuasion is almost everywhere, and we are not even aware of its abundance. We can state out opinion in an argument and show our views, making a proposal to recommend action. In many professions, persuasion is very important; writing letters to gain support for things such as a grant or even gaining support for new developments in a field. Organizations and companies will use persuasion to gain support or a campaign or sell a product. While persuasions and arguments seem to be close to interchangeable there are distinct differences. Persuasions are aimed at influence and argument is aimed at winning a reader’s agreement.
II. Basic Consideration
It is important when writing …show more content…
The Toulmin Method uses data, claims, and warrants to prove a principal. The warrant is at the center of the reasoning and connects the data with the claim, and is usually the generalization the is used to explain how the claim and data are connected. The warrant can be views as the thinking that lead the writer on to the opinion that they hold.
V. Deductive and Inductive Reasoning
Inductive Reasoning can be viewed as reasoning based on experiences mixed with general reasoning. For inductive reasoning to work, the method of collecting evidence to use to base a reasoning from. Inductive reasoning will start with a specific case and then make it into a general statement. Deductive reasoning uses a reverse method from inductive reasoning, taking a general statement and then making it more specific. Deductive reasoning have some problems with going from a generalized statement and viewpoint to a more specific viewpoint, as Scipio Chiaramonti proved in 1633.
VI. Logical …show more content…
Data – the evidence to prove something
2. Claim – what you are proving with data
3. Warrant – the assumption or principle that connects the data and claim
4. Toulmin Method – an informal method of reasoning, it involves the data, claim, and warrant of an argument
5. Syllogism – an instance of a form of reasoning in which a conclusion is made from two given or assumed, deductive reasoning as distinct from induction
6. Non Sequitur – Latin for “does not follow,” a statement that does not agree with the statement it follows
7. Oversimplification – an implication that goes too far and twist the impression that is trying to be given, simplifying an argument to the point where it no long makes any sense.
8. Hasty generalization – an informal mistake in belief caused by faulty generalization, which is reached through insufficient evidence
9. Either/or reasoning – assuming that a reality may be divided into only two parts or extremes; assuming that a given problem have only one of two possible solutions.
10. Argument from doubtful or unidentified authority – passed on information that does not properly state its source and has room for