Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Advocacy and Argument > Midterm Study Guide > Flashcards

Midterm Study Guide Flashcards

1
Q

Argument

A

A claim that is advanced with support

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Argumentation

A

The cooperative practice of making and justifying claims under conditions of uncertainty.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Logos

A

Appeal to Logic, Rooting argument in fact

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Pathos

A

Argument by emotion, Accept conclusion based on feelings

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Ethos

A

Argument by Character, Trust me because of who I am

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Advocacy

A

Bring awareness to topics that are not discussed.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Proposition

A

A statement that expresses the subject and defines the grounds for dispute

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Proposition of Fact

A

Something that makes a claim about something being either true or false.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Proposition of Value

A

Whether something is right or wrong.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Deliberative Speaking Occasion

A

Future based, Course of action undertaken by an agent

Policy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Forensic Speaking Occasion

A

Question of what happened

Goal is to seek justice (Fact)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Epideictic Speaking Occasion

A

Present, Examining the present moment, Questions of value, praise or blame

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Clash

A

Sharply focused disagreement between rival positions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Universal Audience

A

An abstract audience created by an arguer as a reference point for testing ones argumentative claims

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Touhlmin Model

A 
Claim
Data
Warrant
Backing
Qualifier
Rebuttal
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Claim

A

Something that one wants to prove true

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Data

A

Information or evidence that provides support for a claim

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Warrant

A

Provides logical connection between data and claim

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Backing

A

Logical support for the warrant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Qualifier

A

State the confidence we have in the claim

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Rebuttal

A

Exception to the rule of the argument (unless)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Stock Issues

A

Fundamental issues of dispute that become the basis for evaluation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Inductive

A

Starts with specific and works to general

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Deductive

A

Starts with general and moves to specific

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Ways of Inductive Argument

A

Argument by Example, Argument by Analogy, Argument by Causal Correlation,

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Argument by Example

A

One or more cases within a class have common features so other cases in a class will have similar features

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Argument by Analogy

A

Identify Similarities between cases that might on the surface be dissimilar in order for an inference to be drawn. Compare a Familiar thing to something that is less similar

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Argument by Causal correlation

A

Examine Specific cases in order to find a relationship, Cause and effect relationship. A causes B

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Examples of Deductive Arguments

A

Argument from Sign, Syllogism, Enthymeme

30
Q

Argument from Sign

A

Relies on the presence of certain attributes observable in a specific case to prove that it can be related to a generalization that is assumed to be true.

31
Q

Syllogism

A

Formal Logical Type of reasoning, Major premise states a generalization, Minor premise relates a specific case or class to the generalization, Conclusion is deduced from the two premises

32
Q

Enthymeme

A

Premise then Conclusion, Part of Syllogism is implied rather than explicitly stated

33
Q

Types of Syllogisms

A

Conditional, Disjunctive

34
Q

Conditional Syllogism

A

If/Then Syllogism, asserts that if a particular thing occurs than some other particular thing will follow it

35
Q

Disjunctive Syllogism

A

Contains Premises that are essentially either/or

36
Q

Validity

A

Solid logical structure that allows for reasonable connections between evidence and conclusions in an argument

37
Q

Ill, Blame, Cure, Cost

A

Bad News Bears

38
Q

Ill

A

The harm or problems identified

39
Q

Blame

A

Assign Responsibility for ill, the reason or cause

40
Q

Cure

A

Solution to the problem

41
Q

Cost

A

What you gave up in exchange, burdens or disadvantages

42
Q

Decision Calculus

A

Ill mitigated by the cure (Degree policy reduces the ill) minus the cost, Equals benefits of policy change

43
Q

Difference between Proposition of Value, Policy, Fact

A

Proposition of Fact is a statement that is based on something being either true or False. A proposition of Value is based on something being either right or wrong. A proposition of policy is based on a specific course of action.

44
Q

Three Primary Genres of Speaking

A

Deliberative speaking is future based and revolves around the question of what we should do (Policy). Forensic speaking is past based and focuses on what happened (Fact). Epideictic speaking is based on examining the present and what is right or wrong (Value)

45
Q

Personal, Technical, Public spheres

A

Personal is a private setting which includes a specific amount of people. The technical sphere is represented as conversation among people with a specific technical knowledge of certain subjects. Public spheres is in public and revolves around issues of public concern.

46
Q

Syllogism and Enthymeme

A

A syllogism is an argumentation method that includes a major premise which states a generalization, a minor premise that relates a specific case to a generalization and a conclusion that is deduced from the two premises. An enthymeme leaves out one of these parts and instead implies them.

47
Q

Inductive Logic vs Deductive Logic

A

Inductive logic starts with a specific case and then works to turn it into a generalization. Different types of inductive logic include argument by example, argument by analogy, and argument by causal correlation. Deductive Logic starts with a generalization and the works to apply it to a specific case. Different types of deductive logic include arguments from sign, arguments from causal generalization, and the deductive syllogism.

48
Q

Different types of Argument

A

Argument by analogy is when you identify similarities between cases that might on the surface be dissimilar in order for an inference to be drawn. Familiar thing to something that is less familiar. Argument from causal correlation is when you examine specific cases in order to find a relationship. Cause and effect relationship A causes B. Causal correlation relates a specific case to a generalization. Argument by example is when one or more cases within a class have common features so other cases in a class will have similar features. An argument from sign relies on the presence of certain attributes observable in a specific case to prove that it can be related to a generalization that is assumed to be true. Causal generalization is the direct counterpart of the causal correlation. Causal generalization works from generalizations to relate them to specific cases.

49
Q

Literal Analogy and Figurative Analogy

A

A literal analogy is a statement drawing a direct comparison between two or more cases. A figurative analogy is a statement that makes comparisons between classes that are materially dissimilar from each other but that are nonetheless suggestive of each other in some characteristic or matter.

50
Q

Conditional and Disjunctive Syllogisms

A

A conditional syllogism represents an if/them syllogism. If a particular thing occurs then some other particular thing will follow. A disjunctive syllogism contains premises that are essentially either/or statements.

51
Q

Three Qualities of Ethos

A

3 Qualities

  1. Practical wisdom (Competence) Experience, Success, Intelligence, Leadership
  2. Goodwill- Audience best interest at heart
  3. Virtue- Ability to judge right from wrong and desire to choose right from wrong. Honest, consistency Decorum- How one acts, fitness to the occasion, Norms
52
Q

Universal Audience

A

An abstract audience created by an arguer as a reference point for testing ones argumentative claims. Base your speech on something that applies to everyone

53
Q

Slippery Slope

A

One event causes a whole chain of events

54
Q

Ad populam

A

Appeal to popularity

55
Q

Appeal to ignorance

A

What we cannot prove cannot exist, We cannot disprove it so it must exist

56
Q

False Analogy

A

Making an anology that is to broad, All weed smokers are thugs

57
Q

Guilt by Association

A

Feelings towards a certain person because of a relationship to a certain entity

58
Q

Begging the Question

A

Assumes a debatable point has already been proven

59
Q

Ad Hominem

A

Attack on the person making an argument not the argument itself

60
Q

Strawperson

A

Distorts and opponents argument then attacks the distortion

61
Q

False Dilemma

A

Acts like there are only two choices when there are actually many more

62
Q

Red Herring

A

Switches issues mid argument to throw the audience off the scent

63
Q

Non Sequitur

A

Does not follow reaches a conclusion that does not follow evidence

64
Q

Hasty Generalization

A

Don’t have enough evidence to make a generalization

65
Q

Complex Cause

A

Acting like there is only one cause to a problem when in reality there are many.

66
Q

Poisoning the Well

A

Unqualified to talk about a certain topic because of a particular circumstance

67
Q

Tuquoque

A

• Falsely conclude someone guilty of an offense has no reason to tell other people not to do it. Thief telling other people not to steal.

68
Q

Clash

A

A sharply focused disagreement between rival positions

69
Q

Correction- Argumentative and Coercive

A

Coercive correction- Correction is unilateral and you either succeed or you fail. Corrector’s perspective is irrelevant and they run no real risk to their integrity as a person.
Argumentative Correction- Correction is bilateral and is sought not automatically justified. Varying degrees of success. Attitude of corrector matter and can affect integrity.

70
Q

Emotions

A
  • Anger
  • Happiness
  • Pity
  • Shame
  • Humor
  • Love
  • Fear
  • Sadness
  • Patriotism
  • Hate

Advocacy and Argument (1 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions