1705137023
1705137024
Thus, the previous examples in this chapter show how arguments of consequence can be used to support both value and policy claims. Now, this text turns to claims of value supported using arguments of principle.
1705137025
1705137026
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132524]
1705137027
20.3.3 Supporting a Primary Claim of Value Using Principles
1705137028
1705137029
An example of a value claim might be “Teachers are engaged in a noble profession.” As stated earlier, a value claim applies some value, principle, or consequence to an object. In the example, the object of evaluation is “teachers,” and the value has something to do with a “noble profession.”
1705137030
1705137031
The chart below describes generally how the basic pattern can be applied to the support of the value claim:
1705137032
1705137033
1705137034
1705137035
1705137036
The pattern illustrated above differs slightly from the basic pattern used before. The primary difference is that the modifications of the pattern make it more specific than the ones that have been used before. First, although the first sub-claim remains an argument of description and definition, the definition is accomplished by describing the essential features of the object. In other words, the object is defined by the presence of its essential features. Essential features are those without which the object would not be itself. By way of an analogy, an essential feature of a mammal is that it is covered with hair or fur. That feature is so essential that any animal not possessing hair or fur would not be defined as a mammal.
1705137037
1705137038
Second, the next sub-claim is an argument of association, but this time it is an association of the features described in the first sub-claim with some principle. Such sub-claim is frequently developed by using an association of similarity: identifying the principle, and then demonstrating how the object to be evaluated is similar to some other object that the audience already evaluates in a positive (or negative) manner. Associations of similarity are not the only kind of associations that can be used to link an object to a principle, but they are common ones.
1705137039
1705137040
Finally, in the third sub-claim, the principle and, thus, the object itself are explicitly evaluated. The association of similarity made in the second sub-claim is quite important in this evaluation. By showing that some other positively evaluated object is similar to the object that the debater is trying to evaluate in a positive manner, the positive evaluation of the other object is transferred to the object of evaluation.
1705137041
1705137042
That description of the basic pattern used for supporting a value claim using principles is still quite abstract. Hopefully, by using the teachers example, the pattern will become clearer. The diagram presented below is intended to illustrate one way that the claim that “Teachers are engaged in a noble profession” can be supported using an argument of principle.
1705137043
1705137044
1705137045
1705137046
1705137047
The first sub-claim is used to describe teachers. Although many arguable descriptions of the teaching profession might be presented, the sub-claim describes them as a well-educated group, devoted to helping others, even without receiving great financial benefit. The sub-claim describes the teaching profession as unselfish because they put the welfare of their students above their own financial gain. The description that is offered is such that it can later be used to associate the teaching profession with other professions whom the audience will also see as engaged in a noble cause.
1705137048
1705137049
In the second sub-claim, the debater associates the teaching profession with a principle. First, the debater needs to describe and support the principle. The second sub-claim begins by naming the unselfish actions of teachers as an important principle. Potential arguments to support that principle include the idea that such unselfish behavior is for the benefit of students even thought the teachers themselves do not receive great financial benefit themselves. Of course, that argument would need further development.
1705137050
1705137051
After supporting the principle, the debater would then draw an association of similarity between the teachers and some other group that the debater believes the audience views in a positive manner. Any number of examples is possible. The choice of other group should be based on the debater’s knowledge of the audience. The chosen other group should be the one that the audience is likely to view in a positive light. For the purposes of illustration, the medical profession is chosen as an example.
1705137052
1705137053
A sub-claim associating teachers and medical doctors could suggest that both groups consist of well-educated people who are devoted to helping others. The unselfish, and thus noble cause to which teachers are devoted is further enhanced by the fact that teachers, unlike medical doctors, pursue their profession without the promise of great financial gain.
1705137054
1705137055
Finally, in the third sub-claim, both the principle of selflessness and the teaching profession are explicitly evaluated. In that argument, the similarities between the teachers and medical doctors play an important role. The debater might begin by reminding the audience of the noble cause that medical doctors play by devoting themselves to the physical health of others. The debater should show how valuable medical doctors are in the community. Then the debater should, by comparison, show how teachers follow the same principle of selflessness, and thus is engaged in a “noble profession.”
1705137056
1705137057
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132525]
1705137058
20.3.4 Supporting a Primary Claim of Policy Using Principles
1705137059
1705137060
Arguments also can be created to support a policy claim by using an argument by principle. Consider, for instance, the claim: “The United Nations should endorse a Declaration of the Rights of Great Apes.” That is an example of a policy claim because it suggests a new course of action by the United Nations. The claim can be supported by the principle of justice using a modified form of the basic pattern described in this chapter.
1705137061
1705137062
One of the primary modifications is necessary because the above primary argument is based on an analogy, the similarities between two objects, rather than on a causal relationship between an object and its consequences. As a result, the descriptions offered in the first sub-claim will need to describe comparative and contrasting features of the two objects that will be examined in the analogy. Furthermore, the second sub-claim will need to be an association of similarity rather than of cause and effect.
1705137063
1705137064
Given those modifications, the basic pattern used to support the policy claim using principles is exemplified in the following illustration:
1705137065
1705137066
1705137067
1705137068
1705137069
As with earlier examples, the above argument is developed using three sub-claims. The first is a descriptive argument. A central object in the primary claim is “Great Apes.” In contrast, another central concept, depending on how the case develops, will probably be “humans.” In the first sub-claim, some features of Great Apes need to be described. In the illustration below, the debater has chosen to describe Great Apes as possessing advanced cognitive and linguistic abilities, including consciousness and recognition of themselves as distinct entities. Great Apes also have complex social and familial structures. Anticipating that the new policy will extend rights to Great Apes, the debater will need to describe features that can be used to associate Great Apes and some principle of rights. Those chosen features appear to be ones that can be used to create such an association.
1705137070
1705137071
Then, in the second sub-claim, the illustration shows how humans have features similar to Great Apes, such as, consciousness, self-recognition, and familial structures. The primary contrast between Great Apes and humans is that humans are protected by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) but Great Apes are not.
1705137072