Debate and Argumentation

Evangelism – How to Witness – Argumentation Theory – How to Win an Argument

Table of Contents

Debate and Argumentation

The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

– Proverbs 18.17

Don’t have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels. 24. And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. 25. Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, 26. and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will.

– 2 Tim 2. 23-26

Argument Types – Definition of Terms

Rhetorical Appeal – the qualities of an argument that make it truly persuasive. To make a convincing argument, a debater appeals to an audience in various ways. Four different types of persuasive appeals are:

• Logos – Logical appeal, is the appeal to logic and reason with a clear message that cites facts, statistics, authorities, and analogies.
• Ethos – Credibility appeal, used to convince of the credibility or character of a source. Fair or unbiased expertise.
• Pathos – Emotional appeal, used to compel with sympathy, tone, or stories that connect the audience.
• Kairos – Timing, describes the most opportune time and place for the argument to be expressed.

Deflecting – cause (something) to change direction by interposing something; turn aside from a straight course.

Iron Man Argument – the use of creating an argument in such a fashion that makes their own stance so vague that nothing anyone says about it can weaken it.

Steel Man Argument –  a technique that presents the other person’s case in the strongest possible form.

Strong Argument – a non-deductive argument that succeeds in providing probable, but not conclusive, logical support for its conclusion.

Weak Argument – a non-deductive argument that fails to provide probable support for its conclusion.

Logical Fallacy

A logical fallacy is a flawed argument that uses invalid reasoning or inaccurate facts to reach a misleading conclusion.

Ad Hoc Fallacy – is a way to avoid the truth. Instead of addressing the argument directly, someone uses this fallacy to create a quick, made-up reason.

Argumentum Ad Populum (Group Polling, Bandwagon Fallacy) – Fallacious argument that something is true because the majority believes it.

Appeal to Ignorance – this is a fallacious argument that appeals to lack of evidence as support for an opposing conclusion. i.e. we haven’t seen proof of aliens so they must not exist.

Appeal to Pity – using emotion to manipulate someone into accepting an argument.

Argument to/ from Authority – (ad verecundiam fallacy), The logical fallacy of obtaining information and relying on its credibility solely based on the authority of a source. The argument typically follows: Person A claims that X is true. -> Person A is an expert in the field concerning X. -> Therefore, X should be believed. In particular circumstances, it is sound to use as a practical although fallible way of obtaining information that can be considered generally likely to be correct if the authority is real and both debaters have consensus about these statements in this field.

Begging the Question – Using a conclusion of an argument as a premise to support the conclusion.

Circular Reasoning – Repeating the same idea in a different way to support the argument.

False Dichotomy (False Dilemma)- It is the fallacy of presenting only two choices, outcomes, or sides to an argument as the only possibilities when more are available.

Hasty Generalization – Making a broad conclusion based on a small sample or group.

Hollow Man Argument – A hollow man argument is similar to a straw man one. The difference is that it is a weak case attributed to a non-existent group. Someone will fabricate a viewpoint that is easy to refute, then claim it was made by a group they disagree with.

No True Scotsman – Modifying a claim to exclude counterexamples.

Post Hoc Ergo Propter – Assuming since B happened after A, that A must have caused B.

Slippery Slope – Claiming that one action will inevitably lead to a chain of increasingly negative events.

Special Pleading – an informal fallacy wherein one cites something as an exception to a general or universal principle, without justifying the special exception.

Straw Man Argument (Fallacy) – the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction. Misrepresenting one’s argument to make it easier to attack.

Structure of a Debate – Basic Definitions

Resolution – A Resolution is a specific statement or question that is up for debate. Resolution appears as a statement of policy, fact, or value.

Affirmative/ Pro – the side that affirms or is pro the issue being debated.

Negative/ Con. – The side that negates the resolution, or disputes against it.

Evidence – the supporting material for an argument. The standard for evidence is field-specific. Evidence may be in the form of personal testimony, statistical evidence, research findings, and/or other published sources.

Argument – a statement claim or justification for a challenge or response.

Debate Obstructions

A Debate obstruction is a tactic used in debates where someone deliberately tries to hinder the progress of the discussion by using delaying tactics. Irrelevant arguments or excessive interruptions prevent the exchange of ideas aiming to stall or derail the debate.

Ad Hominem (or personal attacks) – Attacking the debater rather than their argument. However, it must still be used to try to attack the argument.

• Tone Policing – the tone argument is a type of ad hominem aimed at the tone of an argument instead of its factual or logical content to dismiss a person’s argument.

Constant Interruptions – interrupting the other speaker frequently with irrelevant questions or comments.

Excessive Talking – Speaking at length on irrelevant points, repetition of points, or repeating the same argument without adding new information or clarification.

Filibuster – an action such as a prolonged speech that obstructs progress in an assembly while not technically contravening the required procedures.

Gish Gallop – attempt to overwhelm the person with an excessive number of arguments.

Red Herring Argument – an attempt to change the subject and divert attention from the original issue.

Ridicule, or Appeal to Ridicule ( or Sarcasm) – an informal fallacy that presents an opponent’s argument as absurd, ridiculous, or humorous, and therefore not worthy of serious consideration.

Scriptures in Reference to Arguments

We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. – 2 Corin 10.5

References

Evangelism – Courses in Biblical Witnessing

CSUN.Edu – Fallacies and the Art of Debate

Pitt.Edu – Resolutions of Arguments