Toulmin's argument model

From the website "Changing Minds.org"

http://www.changeminds.org/disciplines/argument/making_argument/toulmin.htm

Toulmin's argument model

Stephen Toulmin: English philosopher and logician, identified 6 elements of persuasive argument.

Claim: A claim is a statement that one person makes to another, wishing them to accept it as true. It may also be a request for an action one wishes the other to accept as true and then enact. The example given is "You should wear a hearing aid." Claims are often challenged because many people will not agree with claims unless they find a logical basis for your claim, people want you to prove your claim. To prove a claim, one must have grounds.

Grounds: Grounds are the basis for persuasively proving claims. Grounds consist of data or hard facts, plus logical reasoning which is the basis of the claim. Still, there is an element of assumption in grounds because data may be less than 100% positive. Because perception is involved in making claims, the logic of the reasoning may also have an element of assumption involved. In this case, the grounds might be something like "The doctor says that you have some hearing loss" implying that since there is hearing loss, then a hearing aid should be worn. If the grounds are challenged in a claim, proving the claim becomes more difficult because one must seek deeper information about the grounds to prove the claim.

Warrants: Warrants link data and other arguments to the original claim and original grounds. Their function is to legitimize claims by proving the original grounds to be relevant. The warrant may be explicit or it could be unspoken, relying on acceptance that the warrant itself is true. The example given here is "Hearing aids help people hear better." This links the hearing loss of the individual with the individuals action, wearing a hearing aid, to the larger medical data, hearing aids help people hear better. Warrants can be problematic because of the element of assumption present in them. The assumption gives room for the other person to question or expose the warrant, possibly showing its weakness or that it is unfounded.

Backing: The backing consists of more support for the warrant by answering a different question. Here "Hearing aids are available locally." By telling one that hearing aids are available locally you are implying that getting a hearing aid is easy as a way of persuading the person that its not an epic battle to get a hearing aid, which they need because the doctor said, and which are proven methods of helping people to hear better.

Qualifier: Qualifiers are used to indicate the strength of an argument and include words like "most," "usually," "always," and "sometimes." Qualifiers give the argument its strength or its weakness. Here, "Hearing aids help most people." In this case, the qualifier would strengthen the argument because it shows that by getting a hearing aid, there is a very good chance that it will help the person to hear better. Most people hear better which implies that hearing aids don't work for only a small percentage of people. In the very least, it gives incentive to at least try out the hearing aid.

Rebuttal: In any argument, no matter how well constructed, there is always room for the other person to make counter arguments. The rebuttal of counter arguments happens during continued dialogue or can be made preemptively by taking into account the counter argument during the initial presentation of the claim. Here one might initially say "I know that you've heard that hearing aids are uncomfortable and unsightly but I found one that is half the size of a dime, is virtually invisible, and fits very comfortably into small ears."