1705133341
3.4.4 Claim Supported by Other Claims
1705133342
1705133343
Frequently, claims are supported by other claims. Chapter 20 of this text will describe in greater depth the process of combining claims coherently to support other claims. This chapter will introduce the process of using claims to support other claims. The diagram below illustrates the basic process of using two claims to support a third:
1705133344
1705133345
1705133346
1705133347
1705133348
As this text will discuss more fully in Chapter 20, a frequent pattern of using claims to support other claims involves combining a descriptive claim with an associational claim to support an evaluative claim. The diagram below illustrates this basic pattern:
1705133349
1705133350
1705133351
1705133352
1705133353
Using this pattern, an advocate begins by describing (descriptive claim) some feature of the object or policy to be evaluated, then relates that feature to some effect or value (associational claim). Having described the feature and related the feature to an effect, the advocate is then in a position to evaluate the object or policy (evaluative claim).
1705133354
1705133355
An example of this pattern of using a descriptive and an associational claim to support an evaluative claim is shown in the following diagram:
1705133356
1705133357
1705133358
1705133359
1705133360
Although the argument is incomplete, it illustrates how two claims can be used to support a third. In this case, one claim describes current laws (allowing smoking in public places) and a second claim associates that description with an effect (subjecting non-smokers to health risks). Those two claims are then combined to support an evaluative claim about the current laws: Smoking should not be allowed in public places.
1705133361
1705133362
So far, this chapter has focused on the basic components of arguments: a claim and its supporting material. In the process, this chapter has noted four kinds of claims, focusing on claims of evaluation. In the final section, this chapter will emphasize the means by which evaluations are made, especially two methods that we will call principles and consequences.
1705133363
1705133364
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132328]
1705133365
3.5 Principles and Consequences as Means of Evaluation
1705133366
1705133367
Two methods of evaluating actions, and thus of creating arguments of evaluation, are what this text will call, principles and consequences. Philosophically, these two methods of evaluating actions are consistent with deontology and utilitarianism, respectively. Constructing arguments by principle is consistent with deontology; constructing consequential arguments is consistent with utilitarianism. Principles and consequences are related methods that sometimes lead to the same evaluation, yet they have important differences.
1705133368
1705133369
According to the philosophy of utilitarianism, one action is better than another if that action creates the greatest good for the greatest number of people3. Using this kind of evaluation, an action is evaluated based on its consequences. In other words, an action is good if its positive consequences outweigh its negative consequences. In contrast, according to the philosophy of deontology4, one action is better than another to the extent that the action conforms to universal principles. These principles are ordinarily about rights and duties.
1705133370
1705133371
Thus, arguments of evaluation can be constructed by using consequences or by using principles. A simple example can be used to illustrate the difference between those two methods of constructing arguments to evaluate an action. A variety of arguments can be constructed to urge college students not to cheat on exams. For instance, one might argue, “Cheating on exams violates the fundamental principle of honesty.” In that case, a duty not to cheat is invoked as a fundamental principle. Regardless of whether or not cheating has positive or negative consequences for the student, cheating should not be condoned because it violates a universal principle. On the other hand, one might argue, “Cheating on exams puts a student at risk of being expelled from college.” This argument appeals to the negative consequences of cheating, not to a fundamental or universal principle. In that case, as in others, principles and consequences lead to the same conclusion: Cheating is an inappropriate action. But the arguments differ and flow from different philosophical bases.
1705133372
1705133373
Depending on the arguments put forward, arguments and principles sometimes lead to different evaluative conclusions. For instance, if someone argued that a student sometimes should cheat because to do otherwise would risk the student’s educational record and ultimately the student’s employment prospects, such an argument would be based on the positive consequences of cheating.5 That consequential argument would stand in contrast to the earlier argument based on the principle of honesty. The consequential argument supports cheating, while the principled argument condemns cheating. The point is not that one type of argument usually points in one direction while the other type points in a different direction. The point is that these are different methods of making evaluative arguments.
1705133374
1705133375
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132329]
1705133376
3.6 Summary
1705133377
1705133378
This chapter has introduced the concepts of argumentation, arguments, and debate. Argumentation is a process of persuasion in which arguments are presented to persuade a judge or an audience.
1705133379
1705133380
Thus, arguments are particular claims, along with their support, that are used to persuade a judge or audience to adopt a particular point of view or to maintain and reinforce the current point of view. Arguments are the fundamental tool used in debate to accomplish this process of persuasion.
1705133381
1705133382
This chapter noted that an argument consists of four elements, but it focused on only two of them: claim and supporting material. Claims can be divided into four types (definitions, descriptions, associations, and evaluations) and this chapter focused on claims of evaluation because they are the most interesting and the most common in debates. A variety of different kinds of supporting material are available to debaters, including evidence, explanation, analogy, and other claims. In particular, claims of description and association can be used to support claims of evaluation.
1705133383
1705133384
Finally, this chapter introduced two different methods of arguing for or against a claim of evaluation. Those methods are principles and consequences. Principles and consequences frequently lead to the same evaluative conclusions, but they are different from each other in important argumentative ways.
1705133385
1705133386
The terms and concepts introduced in this chapter are important to students who are preparing to study and practice the principles of debate. The second part of this text will focus specifically on Worlds-Style debate and will use the concepts of argumentation, arguments, claims, support, principles and consequences to illustrate how this or other types of debate function.
1705133387
1705133388
这一章节介绍了议论、论证以及辩论的概念。议论是一个说服人的过程，辩手在这个过程中通过论证来说服评委或观众。论证由论点及论据组成，用于说服评委或观众接受一种特定的观点，或是维持、巩固当下持有的观点。论证是在辩论中用来说服他人的基本工具。
1705133389
1705133390
这一章节表明了，一个论证由四个元素组成，但本章仅重点介绍其中两个：论点和支撑该论点的论据。中心论点可以被分为四种类型（定义型、描述型、关联型和评价型），这一章节主要讲解的是评价型的论点，因为这种论点最为有趣，在辩论中也最常见。辩手可以采用不同类型的论据来支撑自己的论点，比如证据、解析、类比以及其他论点等。值得注意的是，描述型和关联型论点可以用来支撑评价型论点。