Argumentation Reference

A reference primer for argumentation theory covering Toulmin model, informal/formal fallacies (relevance, presumption, ambiguity, formal), a 0–3 scoring rubric across 5 criteria (max 15 pts), difficulty tiers (Beginner/Intermediate/Advanced/Competitive), and coaching intervention guidelines.

Toulmin Model

Every argument has six components:

• Claim — the conclusion being argued
• Data/Grounds — evidence supporting the claim
• Warrant — the logical bridge from data to claim
• Backing — support for the warrant itself
• Qualifier — degree of certainty (always, usually, presumably)
• Rebuttal — conditions under which the claim does not hold

A strong argument makes all six components explicit. A weak argument omits warrant or backing.

Fallacy Taxonomy

Relevance Fallacies

• Ad hominem — attacking the person, not the argument
• Appeal to authority — citing authority without evidence
• Appeal to popularity — "everyone does it"
• Red herring — distracting with irrelevant information
• Straw man — misrepresenting the opposing argument

Presumption Fallacies

• Begging the question — conclusion assumed in premise
• False dichotomy — presenting only two options when more exist
• Slippery slope — assuming one event inevitably leads to another
• Hasty generalization — drawing broad conclusions from few examples

Ambiguity Fallacies

• Equivocation — using a word with two meanings interchangeably
• Amphiboly — ambiguous grammatical structure

Formal Fallacies

• Affirming the consequent — if P then Q; Q; therefore P
• Denying the antecedent — if P then Q; not P; therefore not Q

Scoring Rubric (0–3 per criterion, max 15)

Tiers: 0–5 Beginner, 6–9 Intermediate, 10–12 Advanced, 13–15 Competitive

Coaching Interventions

• Score < 6: Rebuild from claim. Ask: "What exactly are you claiming and what evidence supports it?"
• Score 6–9: Strengthen warrant. Ask: "Why does this evidence support this conclusion?"
• Score 10–12: Address rebuttals. Ask: "Under what conditions would this argument fail?"
• Score 13–15: Challenge backing. Ask: "What supports your warrant itself?"