Arguments are a prevalent part of everyday life. Whether we are trying to persuade someone or defending our ideas, understanding how to construct effective arguments is crucial.
However, not all arguments possess the same level of credibility or strength.
There are different argument types that vary in their structure, purpose, and effectiveness.
Without a solid grasp of these different arguments, it can be difficult to construct arguments that are tailored to specific situations.
In this blog post, we will explore the various types of arguments and how to identify them in real-world scenarios.
So, let’s dive in!
Types of Arguments
There are various types of arguments in writing that can be used to persuade others or present their point of view.
Let's explore them.
The classic argument, also known as the Aristotelian argument, follows a specific structure of premises and conclusions.
This type of argument was developed by the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle. It is based on the principles of logic and reasoning.
The basic structure of the classic argument involves the following elements:
- Introduction: presents the issue or topic that needs to be addressed
- Background: provides context and relevant information about the issue
- Thesis: presents the main claim or argument that the author will make
- Evidence: presents supporting evidence that backs up the thesis
- Counterarguments: presents opposing viewpoints and counterarguments
- Rebuttal: responds to the counterarguments and strengthens the thesis
- Conclusion: summarizes the main points and reinforces the thesis.
The Rogerian argument emphasizes understanding and acknowledging opposing viewpoints rather than dismissing them.
This type of argument was developed by psychologist Carl Rogers in the 1950s. It has been used in various fields, such as psychology, communication studies, and rhetoric.
The basic structure of the Rogerian argument involves the following steps:
- Identifying the problem or issue that needs to be addressed
- Presenting the opposing viewpoints on the issue
- Acknowledging the validity of the opposing viewpoints
- Presenting one's own viewpoint as a potential solution that takes into account the concerns of the opposing viewpoints
- Finding common ground and proposing a compromise or agreement that can satisfy both sides.
The Toulmin argument is another type of argument that was introduced by philosopher Stephen Toulmin. He introduced this argument in his book The Uses of Argument.
This argumentative approach emphasizes the importance of evidence and warrants in supporting a claim warrant.
The Toulmin argument consists of six parts: claim, grounds, warrant, qualifier, rebuttal, and backing.
- The claim is true statement that the speaker or writer wants to convince the audience to accept.
- The grounds are the evidence and data that support the claim.
- The warrant is the assumption or principle that connects the grounds to the claim.
- The backing provides additional support or evidence for the warrant.
- The qualifier acknowledges the limitations or exceptions to the claim.
- Finally, the rebuttal anticipates and addresses possible objections to the claim.
Our comprehensive guide to argumentative essay is a must-have resource for anyone looking to master the art of persuasion.
Types of Arguments in Logic
In a logical piece of writing, arguments are evaluated based on their validity and soundness.
Here are the most common types of arguments in logic:
A valid argument is an argument where if the premises are true, then the conclusion is true. The validity of an argument is based on its logical structure rather than the truth of its premises.
Premise 1: All dogs are mammals.
Premise 2: All mammals have lungs.
Conclusion: Therefore, all dogs have lungs
This argument is valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true.
A sound argument is a valid argument with true premises.
Premise 1: All dogs are mammals.
Premise 2: All mammals have lungs.
Conclusion: Therefore, all dogs have lungs.
This argument is sound because it is valid, and its premises are true.
A strong argument is an argument where the premises provide good evidence for the truth of the conclusion.
A strong argument is not necessarily valid, but it is persuasive.
Premise 1: Most dogs have fur.
Premise 2: Fido is a dog.
Conclusion: Therefore, Fido probably has fur.
This argument is strong because the premises provide good evidence for the conclusion, even though the argument is not valid.
A weak argument is an argument where the premises provide weak or insufficient evidence for the truth of the conclusion.
A weak argument is not persuasive.
Premise 1: Fido is a dog.
Premise 2: Dogs can fly.
Conclusion: Therefore, Fido can fly.
This argument is weak because the premises provide weak or insufficient evidence for the conclusion.
Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!
Types of Arguments in Philosophy
In philosophy and critical analysis writing, arguments are used to support claims and arrive at conclusions through reasoning.
Here are the most common argument types in philosophy:
A deductive argument is an argument where the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises.
If the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true.
Premise 1: All humans are mortal.
Premise 2: Socrates is a human.
Conclusion: Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
This argument is deductive because the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises.
An inductive argument is an argument where the conclusion is probable but not necessarily true, based on the premises.
Inductive arguments use observations and evidence to support the conclusion.
Premise 1: Every swan we have observed is white.
Conclusion: Therefore, all swans are white.
This argument is inductive because the conclusion is probable but not necessarily true based on the observed evidence.
An abductive argument is an argument where the conclusion is the best explanation of the observations or evidence.
Abductive arguments are used to infer the best explanation for a phenomenon or event.
Premise 1: The ground is wet.
Premise 2: The weather forecast predicted rain.
Conclusion: Therefore, it probably rained last night.
This argument is abductive because it infers the best explanation for the observed evidence.
An analogical argument is an argument where the similarities between two things are used to support a conclusion.
Analogical arguments use comparisons to support the conclusion.
Premise 1: The structure of an atom is like a solar system.
Premise 2: In a solar system, planets orbit around a central star.
Conclusion: Therefore, in an atom, electrons orbit around the nucleus.
This argument is analogical because it uses the similarity between the structure of an atom and a solar system to support the conclusion.
A causal argument is an argument where the conclusion follows from a causal relationship between the premises.
Causal arguments are used to show how one event causes another event.
Premise 1: Smoking cigarettes is a cause of lung cancer.
Premise 2: John smokes cigarettes.
Conclusion: Therefore, John is at risk of developing lung cancer.
This argument is causal because it shows how smoking cigarettes causes an increased risk of developing lung cancer.
Different Types of Argument Fallacies
Argument fallacies refer to errors in reasoning or flawed logic that weaken the credibility of an argument.
These fallacies can take many forms, such as making unsupported assumptions and using false or misleading information.
Understanding the different argument fallacies can help us recognize and avoid them and evaluate the strength of other arguments.
Ad Hominem focuses on attacking the character or personal traits of the person instead of addressing the argument itself.
Example: "You can't trust John's opinion on climate change because he's a convicted felon."
Appeal to Ignorance
This type of fallacy occurs when someone assumes that something is true because it hasn't been proven false or vice versa.
This is a common logical fallacy that can be easily mistaken as evidence for or against a particular claim.
Example: "There's no evidence that aliens don't exist, so they must exist."
Appeal to Authority
This fallacy occurs when someone relies solely on the opinion of an authority figure. Rather than presenting evidence or logical reasoning to support their argument.
Relying solely on authority can undermine the credibility of the argument and lead to faulty conclusions.
Example: "My doctor said that this new medication is the best, so it must be true."
False Dilemma Fallacy
False Dilemma Fallacy occurs when only two extreme options are presented as the only possible choices. While ignoring the existence of other options.
Example: "Either you're with us or against us."
Straw Man is a type of fallacy that involves misrepresenting or oversimplifying an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack.
This fallacy is often used as a way to avoid dealing with the actual argument being presented. Instead, it attacks a distorted version of it.
Example: "My opponent wants to legalize all drugs and turn our country into a drug haven."
Slippery Slope Fallacy
This fallacy occurs when someone assumes that a specific action will lead to a series of negative consequences. It happens without providing evidence to support the claim.
This fallacy suggests that taking one step in a particular direction will inevitably lead to a chain of increasingly negative outcomes.
Example: "If we allow same-sex marriage, it will lead to the breakdown of traditional families and the end of civilization."
Hasty Generalization refers to the act of making a broad conclusion based on inadequate or unrepresentative evidence.
It involves drawing a conclusion based on a small sample size, biased or anecdotal evidence, or a single example.
Example: "I met one rude French person, so all French people must be rude."
Tough Essay Due? Hire Tough Writers!
Circular Argument is also known as circular reasoning or begging the question. It is a logical fallacy where the conclusion of an argument is included as one of the premises.
Example: "God exists because the Bible says so, and the Bible is the word of God."
Red Herring Fallacy
Red Herring Fallacy refers to a tactic in which an irrelevant topic is introduced into an argument. This is done to divert the attention of listeners or readers from the original issue.
Example: "We shouldn't focus on reducing carbon emissions because it will hurt the economy."
Appeal to Hypocrisy
This type of fallacy involves attacking the person for not acting in accordance with their own beliefs. Rather than addressing the validity of their argument itself.
This fallacy attempts to discredit an opponent's argument by focusing on their personal conduct or behavior.
Example: "You can't lecture me about healthy eating when you just had a Big Mac for lunch."
Causal Fallacy is also known as the False Cause Fallacy. It occurs when a causal relationship is assumed between two events simply because they are temporally related.
This assumption ignores the possibility that there may be other factors at play that caused the second event.
Example: "Every time I wear my lucky socks, my team wins. Therefore, my lucky socks are the reason we win."
Fallacy of Sunk Costs
The Fallacy of Sunk Costs focuses on past investments rather than future costs and benefits.
This fallacy can lead to poor decision-making. It can cause people to throw good resources after bad and continue with an unprofitable venture.
Example: "We've invested so much time and money in this project, we can't just give up now."
Equivocation is a type of fallacy in which a word with multiple meanings is used in an argument. The meaning of the word is shifted to make a false or misleading claim.
Example: "All men are equal. Women are not men. Therefore, women are not equal."
Appeal to Pity Fallacy
The Appeal to Pity Fallacy is also known as argumentum ad misericordia. It relies on evoking pity or compassion instead of presenting logical reasoning or evidence to support a claim.
Example: "Please don't fire me. I have three kids to support, and we'll be homeless if I lose my job."
This type of logical fallacy argues that something is true or right because it is popular or widely accepted.
Example: "Everyone else is doing it, so it must be okay."
How to Identify Types of Arguments
Identifying the different arguments can be a challenging task, but with a little practice, it can become easier.
Here are some tips to help you identify the types of arguments:
- Look for Clues in the Language Used: Different types of arguments often use different types of persuasive language.
For example, deductive arguments often use words like "all," "none," and "therefore." While inductive arguments use words like "some," "most," and "probably."
- Determine the Goal of the Argument: Different types of arguments are often used for different purposes.
For example, a Rogerian argument aims to find common ground. While a Toulmin argument is focused on establishing credibility and strength.
- Examine the Structure of the Argument: The structure of the argument can also provide clues to its type.
Deductive arguments tend to follow arguments of fact and explanation with a clear conclusion. While inductive arguments tend to have less structure and conclusion is supposed.
- Consider the Evidence Used: The type of evidence used in an argument can also be an indicator of its type. You must understand the importance of fact checking in your arguments.
Deductive arguments often use specific examples, while inductive arguments rely on more general evidence.
- Consider the Context of the Argument: The context of the argument can also provide clues to its type.
For example, arguments in philosophy tend to be deductive or inductive, while legal arguments often use analogical reasoning.
In conclusion, understanding the arguments and counter arguments is crucial for effective communication, critical thinking, and decision-making.
This blog provides a comprehensive overview of the various types of arguments commonly used in different types of argumentative essays.
By being able to identify and utilize opposing arguments, one can better communicate ideas and engage in meaningful discussions.
If you're struggling with crafting a persuasive essay that effectively utilizes different types of arguments, our argumentative essay writing service can help.
Our team of expert writers can assist you in crafting a well-written and convincing essay. It will showcase your mastery of various argumentative techniques.
Contact us today to improve your argumentative essay writing skills with our professional essay writing service.