1705136968
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132518]
1705136969
20.2.2 Sub-Claim Two: Association
1705136970
1705136971
After describing the relevant features of the object to be evaluated, the debater then proceeds to the second sub-claim of the pattern, drawing an association between the feature or features and some value, principle, or consequence. The association is frequently a cause and effect association, but might be an association of similarity or some other kind of association. In other words, an association needs to be created between the feature of the object and value, principle, or consequence by which it is evaluated. The examples that follow will illustrate both associations of causality and of similarity.
1705136972
1705136973
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132519]
1705136974
20.2.3 Sub-Claim Three: Evaluation
1705136975
1705136976
Having described or defined a feature of the object to be evaluated and the means by which it is to be evaluated (causality, similarity, etc.), the debater then creates a third sub-claim to make the evaluation explicit. The evaluation begins with the link between the object and the value, principle, or consequence, however, that evaluation may not be explicit. For instance, the value by which some policy is evaluated might not be as clear or vivid in the mind of the audience as it is to the debater. Explicitly addressing the value is an opportunity to provide greater power to the value. For instance, a debater might claim that a certain policy proposal enhances the value of free choice. Most reasonable people in the audience probably accept the notion that free choice is a positive good, but the concept might not be present in their consciousness. Free choice might not be a concept to which they are giving much attention. Creating a third sub-claim that specifically evaluates the consequence, value, or principle from the second sub-claim provides an opportunity for a debater to increase the evaluative power of that value.
1705136977
1705136978
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132520]
1705136979
20.2.4 The General Pattern: Describe, Associate, Evaluate
1705136980
1705136981
So, in summary, a general pattern that can be used to create a case for an evaluative proposition includes: 1) describing a feature of the object to be evaluated; 2) associating the object to be evaluated to some value, principle, or consequence; and 3) explicitly evaluating that value, principle, or consequence. In the following examples, the general pattern will be slightly modified to meet the demands of specific situations. The remainder of the chapter will consider various examples of how that general pattern might be implemented in different situations.
1705136982
1705136983
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132521]
1705136984
20.3 Using the General Pattern to Create Arguments
1705136985
1705136986
The chapter will use four basic examples: 1) combining sub-claims to support a primary claim of value using consequences, 2) combining sub-claims to support a primary claim of policy using consequences, 3) combining sub-claims to support a primary claim of a value using principles, and 4) combining sub-claims to support a primary claim of policy using principles. The examples used in this chapter will mirror those used in the previous chapter about consequences and principles. This chapter will provide a very basic outline of the examples so that students can understand the basic pattern of combining arguments.
1705136987
1705136988
Before moving to the examples, one further comment needs to be made. The initial examples provided here are about how to combine arguments to support a position. The same basic pattern can be used to combine arguments to oppose a motion. Careful readers will recall that several examples illustrated in Chapter 6 and Chapter 7 used this basic describe, associate, evaluate pattern.
1705136989
1705136990
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132522]
1705136991
20.3.1 Supporting a Primary Claim of Value Using Consequences
1705136992
1705136993
Before presenting a specific example, consider the structure of the basic pattern for creating an argument from consequence to support a value claim. The basic pattern is diagramed in the following illustration:
1705136994
1705136995
1705136996
1705136997
1705136998
In a value motion, a certain object is to be evaluated. The first thing to be done is to create a sub-claim that describes or defines a feature of that object. The feature selected for description should be one that can later be linked to a positive consequence. The second thing to be accomplished is to create a sub-claim that associates that feature with a consequence. Since consequences are ordinarily effects of some action, the associational sub-claim will probably be one of cause and effect. In other words, the second step involves creating a cause and effect association between the feature of the object and a consequence. Consequences can either be positive or negative, so the third step of this pattern involves creating a sub-claim that provides an explicit positive or negative evaluation of the consequence.
1705136999
1705137000
Now, consider a specific example of a value claim that lends itself to evaluation by consequences:“Traditional Chinese medicine has an important place in overall health care.” The object to be evaluated is traditional Chinese medicine. Because the use of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has certain consequences (both positive and negative), a consequential argument seems appropriate. The following diagram illustrates how a consequential argument can be constructed using the example.
1705137001
1705137002
1705137003
1705137004
1705137005
A debater could choose any number of features of traditional Chinese medicine, but choosing one that is potentially linked to positive consequences would be most productive. First, a debater might choose to describe the non-invasive feature of traditional Chinese medicine. For instance, although acupuncture uses very tiny needles to penetrate the skin, it is basically non-invasive. Second, the debater would then associate the non-invasive nature of acupuncture to one or more consequences. In the above illustration, two consequences are chosen: one is a directly positive consequence of acupuncture—it has been shown to help the patient in various ways; the other is that it potentially avoids the negative consequence of surgery. Of course, the debater would need to present further explanation and evidence to make those arguments cogent. Finally, the debater would create a sub-claim to make the ramifications of the consequences explicit by showing the real and positive value of acupuncture in helping with certain diseases, and by showing the dangers of unnecessary surgery that can be avoided by non-invasive techniques.
1705137006
1705137007
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132523]
1705137008
20.3.2 Supporting a Primary Claim of Policy Using Consequences
1705137009
1705137010
Arguments by consequence are frequently used to support policy claims because of the obvious fit between consequences and actions. Actions have direct consequences, and those consequences are ordinarily the measure of whether an action is considered good or bad. A debater who creates a policy claim is usually proposing some change in policy—in other words, proposing a change in actions taken by the status quo. The basic pattern used in this chapter fits that kind of policy claim nicely, although, in some subtly different ways than it fits the value claim. The basic difference is that the policy claim is comparative—it compares the current policy to a new, proposed policy. So, the various sub-claims related to description, association, and evaluative are comparative. The illustration below shows how such an argument functions:
1705137011
1705137012
1705137013
1705137014
1705137015
As stated earlier, the features described are not single features of an object but are comparative and contrasting features of a current and proposed policy. Similarly, causal associations must be created between the features of the current policy and consequences, as well as between the features of the proposed policy and consequences. Finally, the consequences that are evaluated are those of both the current and the proposed policies.
1705137016
1705137017
A previous chapter used an example of a policy claim about education to illustrate an argument by consequence. By looking back at that example, an astute student will notice that the illustration followed the basic pattern that is used in this chapter, even though the pattern was not made as explicit as it is now. In the illustration below, the example of the policy motion about education is made explicit by the use of the basic pattern. Again, the claim is that nations should guarantee access to education for all citizens.