Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Arguments are structurally defined by their function of p... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→An argument may aim to promote reflection and raise important questions rather than to resolve disagreement.

    Arguments are structurally defined by their function of providing reasons that justify or refute conclusions (Toulmin, 'The Uses of Argument').

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.All rational discourse requires that claims be supported by reasons, making justification function essential to argument definition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Toulmin's framework successfully explains how arguments work across diverse fields by focusing on their justificatory role rather than form.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without function-based definition, we cannot distinguish genuine arguments from mere assertions or rhetorical flourishes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Some arguments function rhetorically to persuade without providing logical justification, suggesting function alone doesn't define arguments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Formal logic defines valid arguments by structural properties independent of their psychological or pragmatic effects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Toulmin's approach conflates the purpose people use arguments for with what makes something structurally an argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    All rational discourse requires that claims be supported by reasons, making just...An argument may aim to promote reflection and raise important questions rather t...Formal logic defines valid arguments by structural properties independent of the...Some arguments function rhetorically to persuade without providing logical justi...
    +3 moreShow less
    Toulmin's approach conflates the purpose people use arguments for with what make...Toulmin's framework successfully explains how arguments work across diverse fiel...Without function-based definition, we cannot distinguish genuine arguments from ...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit