Wednesday, February 18 2008
January 10, 2009
Today’s Agenda
Your homework for today was the following:
Tie your analysis, evaluation, and synthesis into one 3-5 page argument. You are to come to class with three copies of the document, and you are to e-mail me a draft of the paper BEFORE class (later papers will be marked late).
In order to complete this assignment, you needed to think about what an argument is, and how an argument should be laid out. We did not talk about this in class on purpose, as I wanted you to attempt to come up with your own answers to those questions before we worked together as a class.
So let’s begin today by having you turn over one of those drafts. We are going to be writing for the next ten minutes on the following topic. What is an argument? What is the point of an argument? How did you transform your analysis, evaluation and synthesis into an argument? (10 Mins)
Group Discussion (5-7)
Class Discussion:
What are some basic elements to arguments?
1) Thesis
2) Supporting evidence
3) Good explanation of how your evidence supports your thesis.
Workshop
Step 1: Content Check: Isolate and identify the specific transitions the author uses to move you from his or her analysis to evaluation, and from his or her evaluation to synthesis. If you cannot identify these transitions, or if the transitions need more work to be effective, let the author know.
Mechanics Check: Basic paragraph structure check: Does every paragraph 1) fall between 6-8 sentences, and 2) Contain at least one quote (paragraphs in the synthesis section should have a minimum of two quotes
When you finish reading, write a paragraph on the back that explains what you think the argument is, based on your reading. Is it clear? Can you identify a specific thesis? If so, what is, and can you quote it directly?
Content: Read Chapter 6, identify which kind of argument you find to be most interesting, and explain how you will attempt to transform your writing into that kind of argument in a 1.5 page blog post.
Advertisement
[...] Wednesday, Feb 18 [...]
Chapter 6 thoroughly covers something called the “Toulmin argument.” Essentially what this type of argument does is allow the writer to understand how to defend his or her position with various types of information and techniques. However, there is also a more classical style that I will also attempt to use as a basic outline when taking Toulmin into account. This basic outline will give the structure to the document and allow me to keep everything organized and grouped properly together. It basically opens with introductory information to gain the reader interest and attention, before stating the major claim, or thesis, further into the introductory paragraphs. After this has been completed, any background information will be lied out to give the reader further insight. Then the major thesis or claim will be backed up with the logical and emotional support that the claim arises from. Alternative arguments, or differing points of view, are then brought in to prove why the claim you are stating is better than any other answer. Finally, all these various ideas are brought together in a conclusion of the argument, stating the results of what has been proven or found.
This is a very broad answer to a very specific question however. This is where the tools from the Toulmin argument step in and help shape how these arguments are going to be formed. A very unique tool I have learned from this reading that I would like to apply to this new piece, is the idea of the “warrant,” which basically calls for further defining why the reason for your claim should be believed to be true. Not only should this argument be giving real examples to back up the claim, but the examples backing the claim also need to be thoroughly investigated to truly understand there validity. In so doing, every supporting piece of evidence will be completely explained, and promoting the thesis in order to get the most out of every example that is being presented. This also may yield to some details or evidence being extracted, so that other more important evidence can be properly explained.
To effectively apply this type of argument to the document that I already have will be a little bit of work. First off, I will need to begin re-organizing a lot of the information so that it will flow better along the guidelines of the classical type argument specifies. After I outline my paper into a new structure, I will then go through and start re-reading the backing evidence that supports the claims being made in each paragraph. I want to make sure that the thesis is promoted early on in the piece, and that each supporting paragraph works towards proving that one thesis, or claim, to be true. The biggest change that has to happen is that every piece of evidence that is in there needs to be efficiently explained. Also, the differing views that could try to negate the thesis of this argument need to be brought into question and put against the supporting evidence. This will make the argument much stronger, and make it less likely for the document to be discredited.
Kevin H
2/18/09
R&C II
In this chapter one argument is talked about and that argument is called a Toulmin argument. Within this argument it talks about how claims you makes if they are any good are controversial. The structure of this kind of argument begins with making claims, offering evidence to back up your claims, determining warrants, evidence to back up your warrants, using qualifiers, rebuttal, and then giving a response. This type of argument can be manipulated in different ways, but these basic structures have to be evident within. The most interesting part of this argument is determining warrants.
In my writing, I do not feel that I have bridged my reasons and claims together to make the flow of the paper not so choppy. Warrants are “a logical and persuasive connection between a claim and the reasons and data supporting it” (152). So what I have to do in my paper if find my major claims that I am trying to make look for the evidence that I back up with that claim and find a warrant that makes the paragraph flow. In the reading there were some caveats to making warrants in your paper. The reading said, “when you state a warrant accurately, you sometimes expose a fatal flaw in an argument. However, stating warrants can be tricky because they ca be phrased in various ways” (152-3). Making warrants in my argument could make it stronger, but I just have to be careful that I do not expose any flaw within the argument when stating my warrant. If the warrant does not raise any controversy then I would go right back into supporting my claim. If it was controversial then I would have to explain my warrant then move back into explaining my claim. Overall making a small statement that brings up more controversy than the claim makes the paper side track slightly, but if I do it right then it will bridge my claims and reasons more making my argument flow and have a more persuasive effect.
Another structural piece of a Toulmin argument that is small, but very influential is using qualifiers. Using qualifiers to propose limits on claims is essential part, so that the reader can see what you are saying in a better way. In my work adding qualifiers in the work would most likely have a positive effect on the specific parts. In the section where I talk about Americans being ignorant adding a qualifier might make people see that not everyone is ignorant, but the majority of the population is. If only having a short phrase added to my argument changes the way that readers view it and the argument in turn becomes stronger than it a structural piece that I will benefit from. Changing around my argument to have a better structure and ultimately making the reader understand what I am trying to portray is extremely beneficial. The changes that I would make to my argument are to establish warrants, and add in qualifiers that make my argument more influential. Toulmin arguments are very influential in their structure, and that is why I think if I change around my argument to have a structure like this the reader will be more convinced by the argument that I am trying to make as a whole.
When reading chapter six I learned about Toulmin Argument. This is an argument that’s based on accurately describing the way people make convincing and reasonable arguments (147). Toulmin argument is a helpful way to come up with ideas and test them. The first thing that you start with is making claims, which are debatable and controversial statements or assertion you hope to prove during your paper. I learned that you want your claims to be debatable, a statement that can be demonstrated using logic or evidence, the raw material for building arguments (148). You want a claim that you agree with and can have a stand on and then go back and think, can I take this with a different perspective? Like the book states, “good claims often spring from personal experience. Almost all of us know enough about something to merit the label expert-though we don’t always realize it” (148).
The second part of a good Toulmin Argument is evidence and good reasons. A claim is a lonely statement without the evidence and good reasoning backing it up. The more you back up a claim the easier it is to take either a disagreeing or agreeing stand. Also the more you support it the easier the claim is to understand. Another part of the argument that they say is crucial to a Toulmin argument is appreciating that there must be a logical and persuasive connection between a claim and the reasons and data supporting it. This connection is called the warrant and it answers the question; How exactly do I get from the claim to the data (152)? The warrant tells the readers what your assumptions are. These warrants can be tricky but what you want is the general principle that enables you to justify the move from a reason to a specific claim, the bridge connecting them. The warrant is the assumption that makes the claim seem plausible and often gives the reader logic why not or to do something (153).
Toulmin argument also includes backing up. Backing up of the claims and warrants so the argument makes sense and it’s easier for the reader to understand. Also the argument needs evidence and using qualifiers are important. Qualifiers are words and phrases that place limits on claims and play an essential role in arguments. The logic and facts, encourages you to limit your responsibilities in an argument. Now that I have all this information on how to structure and argument I feel like I can make my oblivious empire argument much better. I know I have a few claims and that I have a lot of evidence and warrants to support them. As Toulmin arguments I have a lot of backing up. Now that I know all this information I will take it and use it in my argument. I will go through my argument and look at my evidence and reasons and then from there know that I can make a claim. I know that I want to pick out controversial topics because that’s what makes and argument. I also know once I have a claim and support to back it up I can add a warrant to make the argument stronger and more effective. I know that using all this information will help me to make my argument as a whole a lot better and much stronger.
Athena Beaulieu
2/19/09
R&C 124
“Toulmin Argument”
Chapter six was based on something called a “Toulmin argument”. When you use this method that accurately described how people convince and convey their position on an argument. These specific arguments deal and take into account the complications in life. The toulmin logic has become a powerful and practical tool for understanding and shaping arguments in the real world. (147) The structure of this argument style will help keep my information organized and affective. In the toulmin argument they begin with claims that are specific statements that can be controversial but support the thesis. The thesis will be backed up with claims, evidence, and the author’s emotions towards their views. The use of other arguments is important to help give a view of the opposite side to prove you points against theirs. In conclusion, all ideas and claims are put together to state one last point, and show the results of the argument.
To revise my argument using these specific methods will take some critical thinking. In my paper I have to focus on making it flow and making sure the claims and evidence supports my thesis. I plan to do this by using something called a warrant. A warrant is a “logical and persuasive connection between a claim and the reasons and supporting data.” (152) What I am going to do is re-look at my claims and supporting evidence to confirm them and make sure the paragraph flows together. This will make my argument stronger and to the point. It is important to word the warrants so as not to stir too much controversy within the argument, sometimes it could get out of hand or off topic. The key is to make sure that my paper has good supporting evidence. Evidence “appeals to values and emotions might be just appropriate as appeals to logic and facts, and all such claims will be stronger.” (160)
Another key part to a toulmin argument is the qualifiers; these can be very affective and powerful. Qualifiers are “words and phrases that place limits on claims and play an essential role in arguments.” (160) The purpose of qualifiers is to put limits on your claims to help your audience understand fully what you are trying to convey. To them your argument will be more affective and reasonable a way to make the argument stronger structurally. In my argument I have to take and compare other arguments that take opposite sides to help me prove my point. For example using D’Souzas article and comparing it to The Oblivous Empire and the facts and claims Hertsgaard makes. Changing my argument around to fit this type of format will not only benefit me but clearly provide my point of view through these methods. I will do this by using qualifiers, and warrants, supporting my claims and providing high-quality evidence to support my thesis.
Chapter 6
Chapter 6 mainly discusses a type of argument called the Toulmin argument as introduced by a British philosopher Stephen Toulmin. According to Toulmin any good argument should begin with a claim or enthymeme, and always have plenty of evidence to support this claim. Good claims are statements and not questions. There must also be a clear warrant, for the readers to follow. It is necessary for your readers to be able to follow in the steps of your thought process if you want to be able to bring your readers around to your way of thinking. Toulmin’s arguments follow certain steps, first “claims should be stated clearly and qualified carefully.” Second, “ claims should be supported with evidence and good reasons”. Third, “claims and reasons should be based on assumptions readers will likely accept.” Lastly, “ effective arguments respectfully anticipate objections readers might offer”. (170)
After reading this article I realized that I have serious work to do on my article. While I have plenty of claims, I discovered that I didn’t have very much evidence and facts to back up my statements. I will definitely have to find more evidence to back up what I have said and more coherently state the claims that I have made. I believe that I will follow Toulmin’s argument outline pretty closely, because while it lets you know what needs to be in the argument, it lets you have freedom to run with your claims.
Jack Prince
In chapter six I learned about toulmin arguments. Toulmin arguments is a method of writing that accurately describes the way people make convincing and reasonable arguments, the key part being way. A toulmin argument takes into consideration how people think and uses that to gain an advantage. These types of arguments are good for testing out ones ideas and arguments using critical thinking. They also help one to understand what it takes to create a good argument and where it needs to go within the argument itself.
I will transform my document into a toulmin argument by first creating a more ‘to the point’ thesis statement. I need a thesis statement that gets right to the point and grabs the reader’s attention and makes them want to learn more about the subject. I need my thesis to be to the point but I still need to educate my audience on the subject enough to help them side with me. If I tell them too much detail about the argument it will bore them to death, on the other hand if I don’t tell them enough information they will not be able to come to a conclusion on who they agree with. Since my main goal will always be to get my audience to side with me I will definitely have to make sure the appropriate background information is present in my argument.
I will need some valid claims in my argument, more and bigger, than are present now. I will do this by raising questions in my argument and answering them with strong, solid, claims. I will support my claims with as much evidence and reason as possible. It is important that I back everything I claim with evidence or reason, otherwise I may come off ignorant about the topic and my audience will not respect my argument. The most important thing about making claims is how I will go about backing them up, there are two main choices, evidence, and reason. If I back a claim with evidence it leaves no room for my audience to question my claim. However if I choose to back my claim with reason I cannot leave any room in the reason open for question.
The next thing I will do to transform my argument is to add qualifiers to my claims this helps my audience ‘trust’ me instead of saying always I might say sometimes. Doing this makes it harder for my audience to question my position. If I say always all that reader has to do is find one instance where something didn’t happen and then my whole argument is gone un-credible. It is going to take a lot of work to incorporate all this into my new argument and make it become strong. I believe once I do this however my argument will be very solid.
After reading the chapter on structuring arguments, I learned a lot about a Toulmin argument. A style of argument the book says works very well out in the real world. The Toulmin argument is composed of some very important parts that help make it work so well. The clams supported by good reasons or evidence to an argument. Then you need to determine what warranted your clams. Those three parts help hold the clam you are making together, allowing the reader to easily accept your clam. The most important part of a Toulmin argument is backing your clams and warrants with factual evidence. The writer must make sure he or she gives the context of the argument. With out backing your argument, it’s like a framed in house with no sheathing or drywall, it’s just the shell.
Now knowing how a Toulmin argument is set up and used properly I’m going to try and turn my argument in to this type of work in the following ways. I’m going have to make sure that every clam that is made in my argument is baked up with good reasons and warrants. So I know that is clear to the reader why I used the clams that I did. I’m also going to need to make the context of the argument clear and to the point. In my argument when I am presenting the evidence with my clam I need to make sure I used qualifiers to help make it seem more trust worthy. To really make this argument work well, there needs to be more comparison and contrast of the argument with other arguments to see other the other side of the coin.
To really help transform my argument into this a good Toulmin argument I’m going to need to work on my conclusion significantly. In making it as strong as I can I think my argument will take on a whole new level. I need to make sure that the readers understand what I wanted them to get out of my work as clearly and effectively as possible. I also need to show my ethos on the argument to effectively get my argument to work. I may need to work on my intro to my argument a little bit better. To grab the readers attention and make them interested in what I’m arguing. I may want to try and make some common ground with my readers to help establish some ethos better as well.
As explained in chapter six, a Toulmin argument is a method used for creating convincing and logical arguments. A Toulmin argument begins when you state a claim, the controversial statement you hope to establish. In order to back up a claim, you need to establish evidence and reason for support. In order to get from the claim to the data, there must be a plausibly convincing connection called a warrant. The warrant makes the claim seem logical. The structure of the Toulmin argument is used in order to construct good quality arguments.
In my argument, I feel like I need to follow the steps of the Toulmin argument in order to make it more understandable. If I connect my claims and reasons better than my argument will not be as rough and hopefully my ideas will flow better. In order to do this, I need to make a persuasive warrant. A warrant “answers the question How exactly do I get from the claim to the data?” (152). The warrant in an argument needs to make the claim seem logical, therefore I need to find my major claims and make sure I have a warrant that is controversial and persuasive.
Another essential part of a Toulmin argument is a qualifier. When stating a claim, a qualifier is used to limit the claim. If I have a stronger qualifier, then I will have a stronger claim. In addition to a qualifier strengthening my claim, I need to provide stronger evidence and reason for my argument. Stronger evidence makes it easier to back up an argument and provides better information for the audience to agree or disagree. In my argument I state a lot of claims, but I think I need to gather more persuasive and logical evidence to support them. This will make my argument more coherent.
The structure of the Toulmin argument seems very basic, but I will have to change a lot of things in my paper in order to convert it to this structure. For example, the first thing I need to do is generate a stronger thesis statement. Once I have done that, I need to think about reasonable and persuasive claims in order to prove my argument. Also, I have to make sure my claims include a qualifier to limit the claim to be more specific. After that, I need to determine the warrant, which leads to backing up my argument with substantial evidence and support. Overall, after reading about the structure of a Toulmin argument, I have realized if I follow the steps to create one, my argument will be more coherent and persuasive.
The Toulmin argument was named after the British philosopher Stephen Toulmin. This British philosopher was looking for a way to describe how people make reasonable and convincing arguments. For these types of arguments Toulmin took in account the complications of life, situations in which someone has to qualify their thoughts with words like sometimes, often, unless and almost.
A way that I would incorporate this type of argument into my paper would be stating the claim of the author which is Americans are so oblivious to as to how are government behaves in other countries that they are surprised as to why they get attacked. This claim that the author makes is considered to be controversial in which you have to prove the claim that you are making with evidence. When an author makes a claim it should be debatable, the point of making one is to answer the question what is the point of your claim. Pablo Garcia is going to miss all of u guys when he’s gone.
When writing my paper I need to back up the claims that the author makes with evidence and good reasons. When reviewing what Hertsgaard writes I take the facts and evidence he provides to back up his claim. For example when Hertsgaard talks about 9/11 he backs up his claim about how America was shocked that someone would do such a thing by talking about how the U.S. treats other countries. After you have all the facts and evidence to back up the claim you then need to determine the warrants. A warrant is a logical and persuasive connection between a claim and its data and reasons. It is how you go from the claim to the data. For example America is oblivious would be the reason, since Americans are unaware of what our government does in other countries would be the since warrant and the so claim would be become aware of what our government does overseas.
Overall when incorporating a Toulmin argument you need to state the claim, qualifier, reasons, warrants, backing and the evidence. After that you then need to talk about the authority, conditions of rebuttal and then the response.
John Brown
English 124
In chapter 6 it talks about the structure of a Toulimn Argument and the way it is to be made. It tells u to borrow stratifies from Philosopher by the name of Stephen Toulimn. What this man was doing was searching for an accurate way to describe the way that many people make convincing and reasonable arguments. Then by reading this I have found that looking back on my arguments that I have been creating for this class hey all have now made the best of scenes even in my own mind. Many will find as the book states that his method will be most helpful to us as a way to create ideas and test them. More or less it will provide us with understanding on what goes in many kinds of arguments.
Also in chapter there is a section on making clams, clams are debatable and controversial statements that you will hope to prove to the person that will be reading your writing. It says that many claims are almost always controversial pending if they are worth arguing on. It teaches us that we should not worry ourselves about the points on which many people agree on , only if it is in a unique situation but in any other time such points have no real point in making an argument on. Also all claims most likely will always be debatable they can be demonstrated using logic or evidence. And at the end of this portion of the chapter it tells us that many of us know enough almost about anything to make a reasonable argument.
And we are writing an argument we must not repeat ourselves and use understanding transition words when we are going from point to point. We are to use Qualifiers whish are words or phrases that place a limit on such claims as “usually , sometimes, in many cases….etc”.
Now when I find myself rewriting his paper that we went over in class there are many things that I have learned that will be helpful to me when I go back and revise it. I know that I will have to structure my arguments better than I have done before and that when I find myself going from argument to argument I need to clearly state my position n the ats that I have found.
Jack Hersom
Comp II
Prof. Crowley
2/19/09
Ch: 6 Written Response
After reading Chapter 6, and discovering what an argument is, I realized that changes need to be made to my argument for it to be more effective. Reading about the “Toulmin Logic,” and way to construct an argument, I noticed that my argument needed specific work in some area. This chapter is significant to the assignment in that the material in the chapter shows us how to construct our arguments in a logical manner. The chapter gives us the foundation in making arguments and is meant to guide us as we construct our own arguments. Prior to reading the chapter, I was confused on how to go about the assignment on making my own argument. However, the chapter provides way in which our argument can be improved. Knowing some of the information about how to construct an argument now, I will have to go back and think of way to improve my writing.
I feel like the main thing that needs improvement in my document right now is making/stating my major claim. I feel like although the claim and main argument is stated in my document, I am not explicit enough in doing so. I need to be “explicit” in stating the main point of the argument because it serves as the foundation of the writing piece. I feel like if I make my claim explicit, it will better the rest of the writing piece significantly. Sense the claim is the foundation to the writing piece, the rest of the document is based on the claim you (the author), makes early on it the argument. Being explicit in my claim will give the argument a chance to sound like an argument, where as in my document right now, I feel I might be simply stating things from the three authors. Making the initial claim better will allow ability to offer “evidence and good reasons,” to back up the claim more effective. It is the backing up of the claim, which gives the argument validity. The evidence used to support claims is relative to the quality of the argument.
Another thing I need to think about in constructing my argument is my use of qualifiers. Qualifiers are “words and phrases that place limits on claims.” This is important in my construction of the argument because it allows the writing to be “more precise and honest.” Using words or phrases such as: few, it is possible, rarely, it seems, it may be, and sometimes, will also better my writing, and ultimately, the quality of my argument.
In going back and looking at my document, I will focus on the “Toulmin Logic.” I will consider stating my claim in a more argumentative fashion because it will allow the rest of my argument to flow better and provide validity to my argument through the increase of quality in my support. My main focus is going to be to try and model my document after the “Outline of a Toulmin Argument.” This will provide me with a guideline as to how to structure my argument, which was something that I was struggling with in my initial document.
Homework
I feel that the first type of argument talked about (the Toulmin argument) would work best. The Toulmin format starts with a claim then follows with a qualifying statement, reasons, warrants, backing, evidence, authority, conditions of rebuttal, and response. This type of format would best organize my argument. I don’t think that the Dershowitz way would, since using 3 or more sources in the argument would make it very lengthy. I would rather try and include specific contradictory statements in a one paragraph, as I think this makes a stronger argument in my case. I think that the classical system would be good except, I am unsure of how I would convince the audience that I am qualified to argue about politics. Stating your qualifications is listed under the introduction in the classical system, so I will not use that format.
In my paper I am going to argue that most American people are not ignorant to American government policies or actions. After identifying Hetsgaards thesis, I will then start to explain my “claim”, or my thesis. My thesis is arguing against part of Hertsgaard’s thesis. This will be the main idea of my paper. Then I will state my qualifying claim that the government is “of the people, by the people, for the people” (Gettysburg Address). Then I will follow with lists of reasons why I believe that people know what the government is doing. Then I will follow with warrants, which may include elections. Then I will start to include my backing, probably a description of what the American government is supposed to be. A democratic government is supposed to be run by the people. Then I will list evidence that will support my argument. I will then quote people who argue the same idea as I am. Possibly add some quotes that argue against Hertsgaard major ideas in his thesis. Then I will list off the conditions of rebuttal. This may include some of hertsgaards main ideas only debunked. Then I will go on to explain my response to the entire document. I will summarize the claim that I am attempting to make, go over the main reasons behind it, and explain why it’s right.
I feel that the Toulmin argument format is the best idea for the argument I am trying to make because it clearly identifies what I will be arguing, and all of the evidence. I think that if I use this format my argument will be effective. This format will also help me to understand the mechanical aspects of the argument and make sure that I am not leaving any important pieces of the argument out. It is essential to not leave out any important structural components of the argument, as this can decrease the effectiveness of it.
In chapter six we read about “Toulmin Arguments”. This is an argument that is based on accurately describing the way people make convincing and reasonable arguments (147). This type of argument makes the writer defend a statement with what should happen now and why that should happen. It is a way for the writer to express their reasoning behind a statement to the reader. Anybody can make a claim but many claims are debatable. The person making the claim must have thorough examples of why there claim is acceptable.
You will first want to give the reason that is going to stand behind your claim so as to get the reader to agree with you such as “Cell phones cause cancer”. This is obviously a debatable subject but most people have heard this so the writer must then give a well acknowledge reason that supports this reason such as “Since the head of a prominent cancer research institute issued an unprecedented warning to limit cell phone use because of radiation exposure which causes cancer rates to increase”. Which then gives the writer the opportunity to state their claim with their facts standing behind it, “So the federal government should ban cell phones”. Now of course this does sound quite unreasonable but the writer has given good evidence to back up their claim.
It is much easier to agree with a writers claim if they have give you ample evidence throughout their writing. When using a Toulmin Argument you must remember state your claim clearly and carefully. You want the reader to understand your point and not take it the wrong way. You will want to give plenty of evidence and good reasons to support your claim. You will also want to keep in mind that your claim and reasons should be based on assumptions the reader will likely accept. An effective argument will address any anticipated objections a reader may have.
CBW
Ch. 6 – Structuring Arguments
One of the types of arguments that chapter six talked about was a “Toulmin” argument. There are three general things that make up the structure of a Toulmin argument. The first thing that you would introduce to make your point would be your claim. A claim is the thing you put out there for you or other people to argue and debate. It is a controversial statement you make in your paper that should be backed up by a thing called evidence. Without evidence, a claim is just a statement that might not be believable to someone.
There are many different types of evidence out there that you can choose to use too. Personal evidence, anecdotes, facts, and authorities are all good tools to use to prove your point. An important thing to present along with the claim and evidence is the warrant. A warrant is an assumption that your readers should be able to recognize after they see all your claims and evidence. Warrants are there to put a bridge between the reasoning and the evidence and just to make a connection to the reader. Warrants are often obvious and are sometimes unstated if the reasoning and claim is understood clearly. Making your point obvious is the goal for the writer to achieve, and that’s why the warrant is there.
One thing that I need to add on to my paper besides some of the things I mentioned above is a basic conclusion to wrap up my whole argument. I have a lot of strong points that are backed up by my evidence and warrants, and all I have to do now is sum things up in one final thesis. To add on to all that, I can make my claims easier to understand by using something mentioned in the chapter six section called qualifiers. According to the chapter, qualifiers are “words and phrases that place limits claims…” (160). Examples of those include many, often, perhaps, possibly, and so forth. Qualifiers play important roles in arguments because they make writing in general clearer and more accurate. I think using these qualifiers will personally make my paper a lot better because after looking at my paper and reading it over and over again, I tend to overlook things and leave out details that are needed for the reader to fully understand my argument.
Another thing that I should pay attention to try to make my argument more in the “Toulmin” structure is to look over it and attempt to add on a few more warrants on after I mention some of my main points and evidence to tie everything together and everything more coherent. I think the warrants more or less will make everything I’m saying in the paper easier to understand.