Videos

Classical Argument Video

Added Jan 22, 2014 •

Copy this URL:
Embed code:	<iframe class="edlio-embed-player" type="text/html" width="640" height="360" src="//www.bmhs-la.org/apps/embed/?v=48593" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Change dimensions

Watch this video to learn about the first argument model, the classical style.

Show Transcript

high class I'm here with Caspar to talk to you about the first model of arguments the classical model this one's actually going to be pretty familiar to you I'm going to review a few things about arguments the first I want to go over the difference between deductive and inductive reasoning so in deductive reasoning name the conclusion will necessarily follow from the premises Ironclad it's definitely going to happen and a premise is a proposition that form argument the conclusion is what's the deuce from the evidence so you're going to have basically these ideas that if everyone accepts them well ultimately lead to the conclusion and so this one is General to specific so an example is that Senator Rudder kiss where is Argyle everyone's day today is Wednesday so that example has two promises the first that Senator Atticus wears Argyle every Wednesday the 2nd that it is Wednesday so it's General right like everyone slightly more specific today is Wednesday and then that leads to a specific conclusion inductive reasoning is the opposite so that's where you go from the specific to the general and the premises support the conclusion but they don't necessarily ensure it in this is based on learning that usually do when you're writing essays on texts and you get a bunch of specific quotes and they're going to support your general thesis play remember the difference is inductive imagine the spot which is your general conclusion and you're putting a bunch of specific promises in it enso in Sample is chocolate chip ice cream is good cookie dough ice cream is good vanilla ice cream is good all ice cream is good colors to keep with our classic theme a little Shakespeare Julius Caesar joke for you syllogism store of you it's the three parts active argument in which the conclusion follows what is the most formal type of deduction so AP students are awesome  insert your name here is an AP student answer your name here is awesome so he has that it's a very clear dial three parts with two promises the first week more General in the second to a specific conclusion I'm not sure if I went over this with you I want to clarify the difference between valid and sound arguments this refers primarily to deduction a valid argument is when the truth of the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises so and deduction if you know your promises you know all of this is one way this is one of those specifics valid you know that it's always going to reach the same conclusion that's different sound on sound is a valid argument so it's a subset so we have all valid arguments we're at the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises then sound is the section of them that the premises are actually true because you can have something that's valid but these are false so it's essentially a lie but in terms of the logic like a math equation it works out the conclusion follows an example of this example is actually not sound beautifly the puppies wearing the puppy can fly so it's valid because you know if we're in a cape gives you the ability to fly a puppy wearing a cape wouldn't necessarily be able to fly my wording of you is a little too imprecise say everyone but it's not sound because one of the premises is false so there's the please reply but not really cuz I'm sorry nickel model review and how we're going to actually talk about the class I'm here some for like that now you going to come up  I hear some background up again in ancient Greece and it was intended for oration speechmaking I'm so it's really easy to follow so if you take mr. Egan search for truth class make sure you do a speech and the way he teaches it is you say what you're going to say you say it and then you say what you said and that's because it's so much more challenging to follow things that are verbal go back and look at previous parts of the text so you have to make it very deliver it I'm going to talk about this I talked about that and ancient Greece was you know all about logic and rhetoric so it's based on formal logic Priscilla jism and it has six parts the first part is the introduction and you're going to see a lot of parallels to the five pair they are five paragraph essay is pretty much based off this style are next to models of argument are going to seem much more exciting and different than this one this one looking pretty standard on which might be nice I'm so the introductions like the opener for an essay about warming up body answer Sable Sheena rap or relating to the general theme or thesis right so giving hints that what it's going to be about and it's you know I want to connect to you I want to dry your attention and I want you to listen to what I have to say I want to feel things my example we have Ariel who is going to give us the speech eventually be writing argument samples here I have it much less formal she's speaking directly to us using a lot of personal pronouns which you will not be able to use sorry I'm so Ariel says attention more people you know me and my love of creatures both under and above the seat It Is This Love that compels me to speak to you today so she's Smurf people's attention she's establishing her for like you know me we already have a relationship and the general theme she loves all three so it's an introduction the next part is the statement of background generally and are five paragraph essay Style the same backgrounds like the middle part of the introduction upside down triangle case of giving you background clarifies and finds any terms that need to be you're having an epic battle against the couch in this room and this is going down to being the case a lot because redeem is much more fluid then structures like this and fly but on the distinction between this and the introduction is often nebulous and has a really fluid transition often they're in the same paragraph sometimes they're in the same sentence so Ariel says for years we have been told is it the surface the mere presence of human artifacts was enough to invoke the wrath of our King we were told it was dangerous we were told they were evil we were not told the truth so we have some nice enough for a with a switch at the end rather if it's fun but here she is narrating the events leading up to the kiss right this is what we were told she deliberately doesn't name who was telling it sounds like this horrible like Facebook being of corruption and it's narrating the events leading up to it this is kind of the context if we think about it in terms of some of the terms review in class is the occasion so she clarifies what their situation is now then comes the proposition I know it's annoying that there are new terms because proposition pretty much means thesis and directional statement so it's going to say State the central position the arguments and it's going to like a directional statement say all of the points are going to make in making your argument and again I'm even though I've labeled Beezus different parts they don't have to be six different paragraphs we're used to in the writing that we do I having 1 through 3 all the same right we're not the tip of that upside down triangle says it is time for the humans to night and fill the community together is this Alliance will we will put an end to the barbaric and ignorant cultural practices if both parties share important information with one another and live in peace so we have the three points right she's going to talk about cultural practices that are ignorant sharing information living in peace with the three main ideas in her argument and obviously her argument is for humans and merpeople team nights next comes the proof and this is the details details reasons the details and reasons supporting the speaker's position it's the evidence so this is the CDC m all of this supports this is often the majority of the argument as you know with our five paragraph essay Style three of the five paragraphs and as a note remember the idea of ethos logos and pathos comes from the ancient Greeks so you're out those forms are going to be littered although not one can argue that there always presents in communication so this is just a section Ariel's argument because this is the long part so I have the blah blah blah when I was in the human world I learned so much I learned about Amazing Inventions make that pork that can improve our lives under the sea as well and this would be in her Section XI that we can learn things from one another so this is going to go in that there and if I were creating this I would write how because she needs to tell us how it's going to improve our lives under the sea so she's bringing in specific evidence and explaining it it again you're very much used to this this is concrete details and commentary next one of the refutation and misses you coming up the most like the newest tape way that I want you to have the classical argument and I think the refutation should be an essential part of every argument essay you write what the refutation does is analyzes the the opposition's argument and summarize it now remember you're not going to do a strong man you're not going over simplify the opponent's argument you're going to show what you're capable of understanding the other side giving them the benefit of the doubt but then after that you point out how their reasoning your point how there I'm reasoning is faulty or why their points is not as strong as yours here you can concede and conceding mean that you're like okay they have a point we should avoid all merpeople becoming human we don't want to do that because we still want to continue are more people culture however that doesn't mean we can't be friends so you can see it a little like that's a good point but you're still going you show how you have the stronger points and I'm conceding is only a small part of the refutation you might well I'm going to give an example yes who's Ariel's refutation  now I've heard it said that we should not deal with humans because they eat sea creatures so that's the opposition's are she's just stating what it is she's not using a bunch of loaded language like now my opponent's stupidly think is one of that being very fair and open-minded sucks can help build her ethos people let me ask you what did you have for dinner last night only seaweed I doubt it clearly we cannot blame them for a fault that we to share so she's showing that reasoning is faulty because in my version of Little Mermaid the more people also eat fish and then the last point is the conclusion before I say the conclusion one thing one point that I would like to make about refutation again this is kind of the case with all of this it's going to be so much fluid but it doesn't have to be yours all of my proof and then here's my ref Haitian some refutation can come up in the middle of roof because after you bring up your opponents do you you're going to need to offer proof offer evidence for why it's incorrect so often proof and reputation are intertwined as well now the completion and this is very much like what you're used to with our conclusion paragraphs and it's going to sum up the arguments discuss the main points key parts of the classical argument is an exhortation or rallying cry so now that I've convinced you we all need to do this bored suggest a call to action like what they're going to do now based on this and that's with the conclusion we're used to that so what and it's going to include ethos and pathos hopefully logos to I don't know why I excluded that they're so Ariel says so as you can sit or whether or not more people in humans should live in harmony remember it is not a question of culture Cuisine but a matter of peace and under hear some final note on the classical argument just some of what we've the classic argument is best used when the purpose of your argument is to persuade your audience audience to agree with your point of you take your side on an issue or make a decision in your favor so faustix argument kind of assumes that it's an either-or thing you my wide is the best that side loses its kind of about winning the argument which makes sense because grease they would argue just for the sake of arguing because arguing such a skill and they wanted their side to win with them when and it relies on ethos pathos and logos which makes sense it works best with an argument that's impartial or uninformed so it often is less successful if you're speaking to someone who has the opposite view as you but if someone like hasn't really taken a side this pretty heavy-handed argument style I'm right the other side is wrong can be effective or if they don't really know anything about and that's like our jury system is modeled after that our judicial system so if you're on a jury you actually try to find don't know much about the subject and for instance they'll tell you you're not allowed to do outside research on like the copyright ice or whatever trials about because they want you to be the impartial juror I'm kind of uninformed based on the information presented to you and you know our Judicial Systems very much competition between the sides with two sides why is going to win  and this is like I said repeatedly the closest your five paragraph essay model so this one pretty normal some when you're used to it hopefully won't be a big challenge for you but now you know it so go out there and use

Uploaded by Melissa Rhoades-Rudder '01.

Videos

Classical Argument Video

More videos from Melissa Rhoades-Rudder '01