Debate Tactics Legitimate and Illegitimate Arguments POLI 12 - - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶

Oct 11, 2022 254 likes •489 views

Debate Tactics Legitimate and Illegitimate Arguments POLI 12 - Intro to IR January 22, 2014 POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics Structure of An Argument Arguments have two components: POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics Structure of An

SLIDE 1

Debate Tactics

Legitimate and Illegitimate Arguments POLI 12 - Intro to IR January 22, 2014

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 2

Structure of An Argument

Arguments have two components:

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 3

Structure of An Argument

Arguments have two components: Premise(s): A statement that is taken as fact for the purpose of the argument.

Ex: The US has the world’s largest GDP. Ex: If Faulconer wins the most votes, he will become Mayor.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 4

Structure of An Argument

Arguments have two components: Premise(s): A statement that is taken as fact for the purpose of the argument.

Ex: The US has the world’s largest GDP. Ex: If Faulconer wins the most votes, he will become Mayor.

Conclusion: A statement that logically follows if we accept the premises.

Premise #1: Economic power is solely determined by GDP. Premise #2: The US has the largest GDP in the world. Conclusion: The US has the most economic power.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 5

Valid Answers to an Argument

How should you challenge an argument?

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 6

Valid Answers to an Argument

How should you challenge an argument? Example:

Premise: If Faulconer wins more votes than Alvarez, he will become Mayor. Premise: If Faulconer becomes Mayor, he will be happy. Conclusion: If Faulconer wins more votes than Alvarez, he will be happy.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 7

Valid Answers to an Argument

How should you challenge an argument? Example:

Premise: If Faulconer wins more votes than Alvarez, he will become Mayor. Premise: If Faulconer becomes Mayor, he will be happy. Conclusion: If Faulconer wins more votes than Alvarez, he will be happy.

Counter Arguments:

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 8

Valid Answers to an Argument

How should you challenge an argument? Example:

Premise: If Faulconer wins more votes than Alvarez, he will become Mayor. Premise: If Faulconer becomes Mayor, he will be happy. Conclusion: If Faulconer wins more votes than Alvarez, he will be happy.

Counter Arguments:

Challenge the logic and accuracy of the premises.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 9

Valid Answers to an Argument

How should you challenge an argument? Example:

Premise: If Faulconer wins more votes than Alvarez, he will become Mayor. Premise: If Faulconer becomes Mayor, he will be happy. Conclusion: If Faulconer wins more votes than Alvarez, he will be happy.

Counter Arguments:

Challenge the logic and accuracy of the premises. Examine the evidentiary support for the premises.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 10

Valid Answers to an Argument

How should you challenge an argument? Example:

Premise: If Faulconer wins more votes than Alvarez, he will become Mayor. Premise: If Faulconer becomes Mayor, he will be happy. Conclusion: If Faulconer wins more votes than Alvarez, he will be happy.

Counter Arguments:

Challenge the logic and accuracy of the premises. Examine the evidentiary support for the premises. Those premises alone are not sufficient to reach the conclusion.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 11

Invalid Answers to an Argument

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 12

Invalid Answers to an Argument

False Premise: assumes facts not in evidence. Example: China has more military power than the US.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 13

Invalid Answers to an Argument

False Premise: assumes facts not in evidence. Example: China has more military power than the US. Vagueness: using “weasel” words. Example: “Intervention” could mean many things.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 14

Invalid Answers to an Argument

False Premise: assumes facts not in evidence. Example: China has more military power than the US. Vagueness: using “weasel” words. Example: “Intervention” could mean many things. Post hoc ergo propter hoc: assume causality because

f order.

Example: Bush was elected before 9/11, therefore he caused it.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 15

Invalid Answers to an Argument

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 16

Invalid Answers to an Argument

False dichotomy: examining only the extremes. Example: We either participate in the ICC, or abandon all international cooperation.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 17

Invalid Answers to an Argument

False dichotomy: examining only the extremes. Example: We either participate in the ICC, or abandon all international cooperation. Slippery slope: predicts unlikely consequences. Example: If we don’t reduce carbon emissions, global warming will go out of control, sea levels will rise, and billions of people will die.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 18

Invalid Answers to an Argument

False dichotomy: examining only the extremes. Example: We either participate in the ICC, or abandon all international cooperation. Slippery slope: predicts unlikely consequences. Example: If we don’t reduce carbon emissions, global warming will go out of control, sea levels will rise, and billions of people will die. Ad hominem: attacks the opponent, not the argument. Example: Don’t believe Krugman - he’s too liberal.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 19

Invalid Answers to an Argument

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 20

Invalid Answers to an Argument

Appeals to Emotion: Rhetoric or authority, not logic. Example: Krugman says free trade is good, and he has a Nobel Prize!

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 21

Invalid Answers to an Argument

Appeals to Emotion: Rhetoric or authority, not logic. Example: Krugman says free trade is good, and he has a Nobel Prize! Changing the subject / Nitpicking: redirects attention away from substance. Example: Nuclear proliferation isn’t a threat: chemical weapons are.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 22

Invalid Answers to an Argument

Appeals to Emotion: Rhetoric or authority, not logic. Example: Krugman says free trade is good, and he has a Nobel Prize! Changing the subject / Nitpicking: redirects attention away from substance. Example: Nuclear proliferation isn’t a threat: chemical weapons are. Strawperson: simplifies an argument to misrepresent. Example: Our opponents want you to believe that we should always defer to the United Nations.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics

SLIDE 23

Invalid Answers to an Argument

Appeals to Emotion: Rhetoric or authority, not logic. Example: Krugman says free trade is good, and he has a Nobel Prize! Changing the subject / Nitpicking: redirects attention away from substance. Example: Nuclear proliferation isn’t a threat: chemical weapons are. Strawperson: simplifies an argument to misrepresent. Example: Our opponents want you to believe that we should always defer to the United Nations. Intimidation: badgering your opponent. Example: Being rude, interrupting your opponent, etc.

POLI 12 - Intro to IR Debate Tactics