Structures of argument
Arguments can be organised in different ways. Classical, Toulmin, and Rogerian models give writers tools for different situations.
What an argument is
In academic writing, an argument is not a quarrel. It is a reasoned case for a claim, supported by evidence and reasoning, that takes other views seriously. The goal is to convince a thoughtful reader or to advance understanding of an issue.
Classical argument
The classical structure, from ancient rhetoric, has five parts: introduction (hook, context, thesis), background (necessary information), lines of argument (reasons with evidence), refutation (addressing counterarguments), and conclusion (summing up and calling for action or reflection). It suits audiences who are undecided or neutral.
The Toulmin model
Philosopher Stephen Toulmin broke arguments into parts: the claim (what you argue), the grounds or data (evidence), and the warrant (the assumption linking evidence to claim). Additional parts include backing (support for the warrant), qualifiers ('usually', 'in most cases'), and rebuttals (conditions where the claim may not hold).
Warrants
Warrants are often unstated. If you claim 'The school should start later because teenagers' sleep cycles shift later', the warrant is that schools should schedule around students' biology. If your audience doubts the warrant, you must state and support it. Uncovering hidden warrants is a powerful way to analyse arguments.
Rogerian argument
Based on psychologist Carl Rogers' ideas about communication, Rogerian argument seeks common ground. It begins by fairly stating the opposing view, acknowledges where it is valid, explains your view, and proposes a solution that serves shared goals. It suits hostile or highly polarised audiences, where confrontation would close minds.
Counterarguments and rebuttals
Addressing counterarguments strengthens an argument: it shows you have considered other views (building ethos) and lets you answer objections before readers raise them. You can concede a point ('it is true that...'), then rebut it ('however...'), or show it does not outweigh your reasons.
Qualifiers
Absolute claims are easy to attack. Words like 'often', 'most', 'likely', and 'in many cases' make claims more accurate and defensible. 'Social media causes depression' overstates the evidence; 'Heavy social media use is associated with higher rates of depression among some teenage girls' is more precise.
Worked example
Toulmin analysis: Claim, 'The city should ban leaf blowers powered by petrol.' Grounds, 'They emit high levels of pollution and noise.' Warrant, 'Cities should limit equipment that harms residents' health.' Qualifier, 'in residential areas'. Rebuttal, 'unless electric alternatives are unaffordable for small landscaping businesses', which might lead the writer to propose subsidies.
Key takeaways
An argument is a reasoned case, not a quarrel. Classical arguments move through introduction, background, reasons, refutation, and conclusion. Toulmin analyses claim, grounds, warrant, backing, qualifiers, and rebuttals; hidden warrants often decide persuasiveness. Rogerian argument seeks common ground with resistant audiences. Counterarguments and qualifiers make arguments stronger.
Flashcard
Reasoned case for a claim
Check your understanding
When is a Rogerian approach most useful?