Argumentation

Identifying Arguments

• What Cannot be argued– Discrete Facts without interpretation- Obama won the

2008 election

– Impossibilities (who would win the bear or the lion)

– Preferences (Mr. Pibb is better than Dr. Pepper)

– Beliefs beyond Human experience (invoking God)-

Analyzing Arguments and Evidence• Components of a valid argument

– Examine the Accuracy• Supporting reasons are true and accurate• The Structure of the argument is valid

• Valid arguments have:– An Argument (what the proponent/opponent wants)– A well justified reason (why they want it)

• Accurate and logical

– A Policy conclusion• The policy based on this conclusion

How to Analyze the Argument

• Is the argument empirical?

• Does the argument present any supporting data?

• What is the source of the data? Is it trustworthy?

Interest Groups as Actors

What is Important• Money

• Size

• Cohesiveness

What is not• Grassroots (unless

astroturf)

• Unconventional tactics

• Everything that is not on the left hand side.

How to determine power?

• At the Federal Level– www.opensecrets.org

• At the State Level– http://www.followthemoney.org/

When Looking at Politicians

Who Matters• Must be elected, or well

known candidates

• The more senior the better

• The more members of their party in the legislature, the better

Who Does Not• Old elected officials (George

W. Bush)

• Candidates and partieswho do not have a chance

• Lower-level bureaucrats

Decision makers are more important than non-decision

makers

An example of an Argument

• Argument: We need to insure the 30+ Million Americans do not have health care

• Reason: Persons without health care drive up the cost of insurance for all Americans

• Conclusion: We should implement a single-payer plan proposed by Congress

What is missing from this argument?

What Qualifies as evidence

• Research studies and Surveys– Method• Phone, in person, mail

– Sample size• Larger is better if collected properly

– Sponsor• Many research studies are very dated

What qualifies as Evidence

• Case Studies– An application of the policy solution to a smaller

group• State level• Municipal.

– Be Careful• May not be generalizable• Apples to oranges• Remember that the United States is unique

What Qualifies as Evidence

• Expert Testimony – http://www.kvue.com/news/politics/Professor-Hutchison-campaign-on-death-watch-after-poll-83486467.html

– Can be misleading– Personal experience is the weakest form of

evidence• Precedents– Previous attempts at policy– Examine the similarities and dissimilarities– E.g. 1994 vs. 2010 Health Care Bill

FALLACIES

Fallacies

• A way of making a persuasive argument, via a mistake in reasoning

• Faulty Logic

Ecological Fallacy

• Using Aggregate Data to infer individual opinions. (taking means or grouped data and using it to explain the actions of individuals)

• Also called the fallacy of division- if the whole possesses a quality, but the parts might not

• On Grandpa Simpson wanting to help: "Call this an unfair generalization if you must, but old people are no good at everything." Moe the Bartender from the Simpsons

Exception Fallacy

• Taking individual behavior and applying to a group.

• Stereotyping

• Applying the preferences of one actor to a class of political actors

• Using one extreme “story” to justify macro-level policy

Hasty Generalization

• Using a small or non-representative sample to prove a point. (a type of exception fallacy)

• I know a guy who didn’t vote for McCain, because of Palin, so she must have cost him the election

• Everyone I know voted for Rick Perry in Iowa, how did he lose?

Faulty Generalization

• An example of the exception fallacy

• Evaluating all with criteria that apply only to some

• Be wary of saying that “Democrats”, “Republicans”, Liberals, Conservatives, believe something. Attach names with parties.

AD HOMINEN ("to the man“)

• Discredit a person's qualities or circumstances

• Don’t trust Dick Cheney, everyone knows he’s evil.

• Any Examples?

APPEAL TO AUTHORITY

• Expert Authorities can be useful for argumentation (e.g. Federal Data).

• Fallacious if the authority is not really an expert or when there are trust issues

– Because Sean Penn likes Hugo Chavez, he has to be a good guy after all.

• Television Ad’s do this all the time with endorsements

EMOTIONAL APPEAL

• Appeals to fear and pity with little relevance to the issue

• Often Involve threats, pity, appeals to fear, evoke sympathy.

• Cutesy stories

• Here is a example

SLIPPERY SLOPE

• One undesirable effect will automatically lead to another and another

• We elect Obama and we will all be socialists, and then communists

Argument from Ignorance

• In Logic, all hypotheses are false until proven true.

• In this case, you assume something is true until proven false.– Kennedy assassination was an inside job– 9/11 was an inside job- prove me wrong.

For Submission 2

• Present arguments that make sense

• Present arguments from actors that are politically relevant

• Present arguments that are directly related to the issues.

For Submission 2

• Keep writing 1 page a day or finding 1 good source a day

• Spend at least 1 hour a day in a place where you are most comfortable for studying

• Don’t