SDS Introduction to Argumentation

Август 9, 2022

Главная
Английский язык
SDS Introduction to Argumentation

Содержание

2. Plan for Today Attendance News pieces Common mistakes in quiz 1 Missing person Basics of argumentation
3. Common Mistakes The length of prep time The role of CG/CO DLO’s team The length of
4. Argumentation. Internal Structure SEXIC Statement Explanation eXample Impact + Comparative
5. Basic Logic If A=B and B=C, then A=C Example: Cat (A) is an animal (B) Animal
6. Argumentation. Internal Structure SEXIC Statement is your conclusion Explanation is how you get to this conclusion
7. Argumentation. Internal Structure SEXIC Impact is why anyone should care about your argument Degree Target What
8. Weighing Probability Importance “Even if”
9. Argumentation. External Structure Separate points + subpoints Signposting Clear transitions
10. Argumentation mistake #1 Self-evident conclusions do not exist in debates Examples Narratives: “We should not have
11. Argumentation mistake #1 How to avoid this? Narratives: Always explain why an argument will lead to
12. Mistake #2 possibility vs probability Examples “What if the government is corrupt? They can use this
13. Mistake #2 possibility vs probability How to avoid Characterization! Find structural explanations. Look at the words
14. Mistake #3 exaggeration and generalization Example “This motion will end poverty / will lead to World
15. Mistake #4 Leaving your arguments unprotected You must expect the other side – and start fighting
16. Mistake #5 Not thinking as a judge Focus on the logic. Before the debate, what sentence,
17. Logical fallacies Addressing authorities Strawman argument False cause Appeal to emotions Ad hominem Because it exists,
19. Скачать презентацию

Слайд 2

Plan for Today
Attendance
News pieces
Common mistakes in quiz 1
Missing person
Basics of argumentation
Argumentation

mistakes
Practice drills

Слайд 3

Common Mistakes
The length of prep time
The role of CG/CO
DLO’s team
The

length of a speech
POI time limit

Слайд 4

Argumentation. Internal Structure SEXIC
Statement
Explanation
eXample
Impact
+ Comparative

Слайд 5

Basic Logic
If A=B and B=C, then A=C
Example:
Cat (A) is an animal

(B)
Animal (B) are less smart than humans (C)
Cat (A) is less smart than humans (C)

Слайд 6

Argumentation. Internal Structure SEXIC
Statement is your conclusion
Explanation is how you get

to this conclusion from a basic “universally” accepted assumption
Why is this true
Multiple warrants -> better probability
Example show that you explanation is realistic

Слайд 7

Argumentation. Internal Structure SEXIC
Impact is why anyone should care about your

argument
Degree
Target
What groups are affected? How are they going to react?
Big groups vs important (most vulnerable) groups
Short-term vs long-term
Comparative is (1) explaining that your argument is unique and (2) weighing it against the Squo or opposing arguments

Слайд 8

Weighing
Probability
Importance
“Even if”

Слайд 9

Argumentation. External Structure
Separate points + subpoints
Signposting
Clear transitions

Слайд 10

Argumentation mistake #1
Self-evident conclusions do not exist in debates
Examples
Narratives: “We should

not have unlimited immigration, because it will lead to a backlash and more people will become racist” – what harm does this lead to?
Principles: “We should allow unlimited immigration, because borders are arbitrary” – why is arbitrariness bad?
Generic outcome: “We should make voting compulsory because it will increase democratic participation” – why is democratic participation good or important?

Слайд 11

Argumentation mistake #1
How to avoid this?
Narratives: Always explain why an argument

will lead to a practical change / a shift in perceptions that leads to practical outcomes / is the only way a marginalized issue or group can get exposure.
Principles: Explain why that is a principle we share, something we find morally abhorrent, why is a principle worth upholding. (Alex’s workshop is great!)
Value neutral or generic outcomes: Explanatory. Need to explain one step further - why is this bad.

Слайд 12

Mistake #2 possibility vs probability
Examples
“What if the government is corrupt? They

can use this policy to their advantage!” – but will they?
“We should ban gambling because poor people lose a lot of their money and get stuck in poverty” – but do they?

Слайд 13

Mistake #2 possibility vs probability
How to avoid
Characterization!
Find structural explanations. Look at

the words in the motion, details about your context.
“Might” vs “Will” vs “Likely”

Слайд 14

Mistake #3 exaggeration and generalization
Example
“This motion will end poverty / will

lead to World War 3 / will end the Israel-Palestine Conflict / will end sexism” – you sure about that?
How to avoid
Specificity
Trade off groups, pick the most important one

Слайд 15

Mistake #4 Leaving your arguments unprotected
You must expect the other side

– and start fighting on that clash. Always ask yourself in prep time – what is the other side going to say, where is the disagreement going to happen? You can start fighting and minimize it.
Pre-empt attacks on your argument, push yourself for more detail and one more why. If you had to attack your argument – how would you do it? That’s the crucial link to develop. Ask yourself why things are true, what POI you would ask. How speaker scales work.

Слайд 16

Mistake #5 Not thinking as a judge
Focus on the logic. Before

the debate, what sentence, if I convince the judge, means I win the debate? What is a case, rather than a list of arguments.
Ask yourself which arguments are strongest. Track the debate: Is your argument such that it relies disproportionately on one single premise?
How do the arguments play out? What do you need to do to win? It is a comparison: which arguments are biggest, are you only mitigating or are you defeating? Strong arguments: attack them, defeat them. Choose your extension accordingly.
Judges are subjective humans who are happy to be swayed.
This means: impacting matters. Tell the judges how to judge. It can also be useful to also tell judges what they can and cannot credit.
This means: Clarity matters. Teamwork is important. Having a team line you mention often is good. In whip, don’t let new material distract the judges, and win with what has been said so far.

Слайд 17

Logical fallacies
Addressing authorities
Strawman argument
False cause
Appeal to emotions
Ad hominem
Because it exists, it

is good
Black or white
Nature appeal

SDS Introduction to Argumentation

Содержание

Plan for TodayAttendanceNews piecesCommon mistakes in quiz 1Missing personBasics of argumentationArgumentation

Common MistakesThe length of prep time The role of CG/CODLO’s teamThe

Argumentation. Internal Structure SEXICStatementExplanationeXampleImpact+ Comparative

Basic LogicIf A=B and B=C, then A=CExample:Cat (A) is an animal

Argumentation. Internal Structure SEXICStatement is your conclusionExplanation is how you get

Argumentation. Internal Structure SEXICImpact is why anyone should care about your

WeighingProbabilityImportance“Even if”

Argumentation. External StructureSeparate points + subpointsSignpostingClear transitions

Argumentation mistake #1Self-evident conclusions do not exist in debatesExamplesNarratives: “We should

Argumentation mistake #1How to avoid this?Narratives: Always explain why an argument

Mistake #2 possibility vs probabilityExamples“What if the government is corrupt? They

Mistake #2 possibility vs probabilityHow to avoidCharacterization!Find structural explanations. Look at

Mistake #3 exaggeration and generalizationExample“This motion will end poverty / will

Mistake #4 Leaving your arguments unprotectedYou must expect the other side

Mistake #5 Not thinking as a judgeFocus on the logic. Before

Logical fallaciesAddressing authoritiesStrawman argumentFalse causeAppeal to emotionsAd hominemBecause it exists, it

Похожие презентации