Eight argument components

Now that we've covered the argument components individually, let's review the visualisation we used at the start to get a sense of how they fit together.

Read it and see if it makes more sense this time!

(And note that there are a few extra details in this version!)

1. ISSUE

Every argument begins with an issue: a contested question or problem that needs to be resolved.

2. CLAIM

To resolve the issue, we make a claim, which is the answer or conclusion we want the audience to accept.

3. REASON

To get our audience to agree with our conclusion, we provide a reason, which is a because statement that justifies our claim.

It needs to be causally linked to the claim.

(CORE ARGUMENT)

Taken together, a claim plus a reason is the smallest possible argument, what we call a core argument: this solution because this reason.

4. EVIDENCE

Sometimes, a core argument is all you need to convince an audience.

However, most of the time you need to provide evidence: facts, data, and other material that are connected through reasoning to support the core argument.

MULTIPLE PIECES OF EVIDENCE

Usually, we'd provide more than one piece of evidence to support an argument. 

And evidence can take many forms: lived experience, research reports, data & charts, and so on.

5. LIMITS

The world is complicated, and it's impossible to know everything for certain, so in complex arguments we often limit the scope and certainty of different parts of the argument.

We might do this to make our argument a smaller target for attackers or we might do it in order to be more honest and accurate.

6. REBUTTAL

Because arguments are about contested issues, they are subject to dispute. Counter-claims and evidence that challenge an argument are called rebuttals.

A well-crafted argument will often anticipate objections either by limiting its scope and certainty or by pre-emptively addressing the rebuttals and providing counter-rebuttals).

MULTIPLE REASONS (AND EVEN MORE EVIDENCE)

Even a simple argument usually includes several pieces of evidence.

But more complex arguments often require multiple reasons (producing multiple core arguments).

And more reasons mean more supporting evidence!

THE SCARY TRUTH

By this stage, we're building an increasingly elaborate architecture composed of issues, claims, reasons, and evidence (plus limits and rebuttal).

The existential crisis comes when you realise that all these components are, actually, just claims with fancy job titles.

Everything's a claim, because everything can be challenged.

"Evidence" is made of "facts", but facts are just claims that everyone already agrees on and take for granted.

Even the most elemental fact can be challenged. Not necessarily correctly or in good faith! But argument is a social process, and sometimes people will dispute even the most basic facts.

(This is why trust is fundamental to persuasion, which is a topic for another lesson.)

BUILDING A LADDER FROM GROUND TRUTH

Given that it can be so hard to agree on what to believe, one way to see an argument is as a path that guides the audience from less-contested claims that they readily accept to more contested claims that they don't (yet) accept.

7. ASSUMPTIONS

Since we can't include every fact or respond to every objection, we eventually have to make some assumptions.

What key facts do the audience need to believe, and what values do they need to hold, for our reasoning to make sense?

These assumptions exist whether or not the argument mentions them!

8. BACKING

In case you hadn't noticed, our assumptions are also claims, which means they have their own unstated evidence that supports the assumptions.

We call this assumed evidence backing.

CHALLENGING ASSUMPTIONS

While the assumptions and backing behind an argument might be buried and unstated, they can be exposed and challenged.

Often this is one of the key lines of attack when disputing an argument: exposing faulty or problematic assumptions, attacking their backing, and suggesting alternatives.

PULLING IT ALL TOGETHER

That's argument structure in a nutshell!

Here's a simplified diagram that lists the components without showing how they fan out in a coral-like structure in actual arguments.