Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Argumentation & Persuasive Speeches: Claims & Structures, Assignments of Japanese Language

An overview of different types of argumentative claims - fact, value, and policy - and organizational structures for persuasive speeches. It covers the characteristics of each claim and the corresponding speech patterns, including statement of reasons, speech of refutation, classical argument structure, and delayed thesis structure (rogerian argument). It also discusses the monroe motivated sequence and the importance of a good call to action.

Typology: Assignments

2021/2022

Uploaded on 08/01/2022

hal_s95
hal_s95 🇵🇭

4.4

(652)

10K documents

1 / 4

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
1
FACT, VALUE, AND POLICY CLAIMS
A fact claim is a statement about how things were in the past, how they are in the present, or how they will be in
the future. A fact claim is not a fact; it only claims to be a fact. What makes it arguable is that the speaker has no
direct way of establishing the truth of the claim. For example, "The Earth is round" is a fact claim. "In our right-
handed world, left-handed people are discriminated against" is a fact claim. A persuasive speaker must provide
arguments which build a case in favor of the claim, showing that the claim is probably true.
Value claims are arguable statements concerning the relative merits of something which is measured subjectively
(e.g., "Hawaii is a better place to go for summer vacation than Colorado."). What makes a value claim arguable is
that different people may disagree on the criteria used to evaluate something (e.g., weather, live entertainment,
water sports). Defending a value claim involves offering a set of criteria for consideration, defending the set of
criteria as legitimate and showing how applying the criteria justifies the claim. Often value claims are comparative.
A policy claim is a statement regarding the merits of a course of action. What makes it arguable is that, even
though people may not be totally certain about the proper course of action to take, they still must act. To argue in
defense of a policy claim is to state that, given what we know now, it’s best to act in the manner proposed.
Samples:
Fact claim (causality): The death penalty does not deter crime.
Value claim: Capital punishment is unjust.
Policy claim: The death penalty should be abolished in Illinois.
Fact claim (existence): Heartland relies less on state taxpayer funding than ISU.
Value claim: Heartland is a better school than ISU.
Policy claim: Students in Heartland’s district should do their first two years there before transferring to a two year
school.
Examine each statement to determine whether it is an appropriate working thesis for a question of FACT, VALUE,
POLICY, or none.
A fact claim is an argumentative thesis which makes a quantifiable assertion; in other words, it is an
argument (claim) about a measurable topic (fact).
A value claim is an argumentative thesis which makes a qualifiable assertion; in other words, it is an
argument (claim) about a moral, aesthetic, or philosophical topic (value).
A policy claim is an argumentative thesis which makes an assertion about a course of action the reader
should take; in other words, it is an argument (claim) about an actionable topic (policy).
1. President Roosevelt knew in advance about the Japanese plan to attack Pearl Harbor and allowed it to happen.
2. If Roosevelt knew in advance about the Japanese plan to attack Pearl Harbor, he was wrong in allowing it to happen.
3. Using lie detector tests as screening devices for jobs in private business is a violation of the employee’s right to privacy.
4. The use of lie detector tests for screening employees in private business should be banned by law.
5. A federal law should be passed requiring that trunk safety releases be standard on all new cars sold in the United States.
6. If trunk safety releases were standard equipment on all cars, we could save several hundred lives in the US every year.
7. Colorizing classic movies such as Casablanca violates the artistic integrity of such movies.
8. Congress should protect the artistic integrity of movies like Casablanca by prohibiting the colorization of classic films.
pf3
pf4

Partial preview of the text

Download Argumentation & Persuasive Speeches: Claims & Structures and more Assignments Japanese Language in PDF only on Docsity!

FACT, VALUE, AND POLICY CLAIMS

A fact claim is a statement about how things were in the past, how they are in the present, or how they will be in the future. A fact claim is not a fact; it only claims to be a fact. What makes it arguable is that the speaker has no direct way of establishing the truth of the claim. For example, "The Earth is round" is a fact claim. "In our right- handed world, left-handed people are discriminated against" is a fact claim. A persuasive speaker must provide arguments which build a case in favor of the claim, showing that the claim is probably true.

Value claims are arguable statements concerning the relative merits of something which is measured subjectively (e.g., "Hawaii is a better place to go for summer vacation than Colorado."). What makes a value claim arguable is that different people may disagree on the criteria used to evaluate something (e.g., weather, live entertainment, water sports). Defending a value claim involves offering a set of criteria for consideration, defending the set of criteria as legitimate and showing how applying the criteria justifies the claim. Often value claims are comparative.

A policy claim is a statement regarding the merits of a course of action. What makes it arguable is that, even though people may not be totally certain about the proper course of action to take, they still must act. To argue in defense of a policy claim is to state that, given what we know now, it’s best to act in the manner proposed.

Samples: Fact claim (causality): The death penalty does not deter crime. Value claim: Capital punishment is unjust. Policy claim: The death penalty should be abolished in Illinois.

Fact claim (existence): Heartland relies less on state taxpayer funding than ISU. Value claim: Heartland is a better school than ISU. Policy claim: Students in Heartland’s district should do their first two years there before transferring to a two year school. Examine each statement to determine whether it is an appropriate working thesis for a question of FACT, VALUE, POLICY, or none.

 A fact claim is an argumentative thesis which makes a quantifiable assertion; in other words, it is an argument (claim) about a measurable topic (fact).

 A value claim is an argumentative thesis which makes a qualifiable assertion; in other words, it is an argument (claim) about a moral, aesthetic, or philosophical topic (value).

 A policy claim is an argumentative thesis which makes an assertion about a course of action the reader should take; in other words, it is an argument (claim) about an actionable topic (policy).

  1. President Roosevelt knew in advance about the Japanese plan to attack Pearl Harbor and allowed it to happen.
  2. If Roosevelt knew in advance about the Japanese plan to attack Pearl Harbor, he was wrong in allowing it to happen.
  3. Using lie detector tests as screening devices for jobs in private business is a violation of the employee’s right to privacy.
  4. The use of lie detector tests for screening employees in private business should be banned by law.
  5. A federal law should be passed requiring that trunk safety releases be standard on all new cars sold in the United States.
  6. If trunk safety releases were standard equipment on all cars, we could save several hundred lives in the US every year.
  7. Colorizing classic movies such as Casablanca violates the artistic integrity of such movies.
  8. Congress should protect the artistic integrity of movies like Casablanca by prohibiting the colorization of classic films.

SIX ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES FOR ARGUMENTS AND PERSUASIVE SPEECHES

1. Statement of Reasons

This structure is a version of the categorical pattern listed in chapter 5 of your text. It is best used with audiences who you believe would already be in favor of your claim (positive) or who are un-invested in or uneducated about your topic (neutral). It should only be used with fact or value claims. This speech introduces your claim and then offers evidence to show how you have benefited from believing your claim that you believe will impact our understanding and invite us to believe what you believe, too.

P Intro provides standard parts with purpose statement providing main claim and preview outlining each of the reasons you believe your claim and that you think will impact us. P Body has several points that represent your reasons for making your claim. You should provide support for each of your reasons. P Conclusion summarizes the main argument and invites the audience to take action. P Be sure to use transitions to explain why your reasons support your main claim. This “reasoning” is very important.

2. Speech of Refutation

This style of speech is particularly suited when your audience is against your opinion but not hostile. You can use this pattern with any type of claim. In it, you identify the major reasons why your audience believes what they do and then invite them to consider alternative information (evidence) and form an alternative view.

P Intro provides standard parts with purpose statement providing main claim. Preview emphasizes the partial nature of different perspectives and suggests consideration of alternative ideas. P Body shows how what others believe and how it is only part of the picture or may even be inaccurate. P Conclusion summarizes the whole picture and reframing the options and inviting reconsideration of the audience’s point of view in light of the new information provided.

3. Classical Argument Structure

This style is primarily an academic structure and is often used with all types of audiences and claims, but is particularly beneficial for mixed (some positive, some negative) or unknown audiences because it demonstrates “objectivity.” This speech is a mix of the previous two.

P Intro provides standard parts with purpose statement providing main claim. P Body has two sections A - Section one supports the main claim of the speech with reasons why you believe the way you do. This section is similar to the statement of reasons pattern above. B - Section two addresses the audience’s concerns about changing their point of view and offers a reframing of it for them. P Conclusion summarizes the main points of the argument, including reasons why you believe what you do, how the audience may benefit from changing their point of view, and an invitation to participate in a meaningful action that supports your claim.

A good call to action is:

  1. Immediate You ask the audience to do the action as soon as possible after your speech.
  2. Specific You tell the audience exactly what you want them to do. You give details and info they need.
  3. Meaningful Ask us to do an action that will have impact. Your call to action should be worthwhile.
  4. Easy for the Audience The more work you do and the less work the audience has to do, the more likely your call to action will be completed.
  5. Researched A good call to action takes time and investment on your part, including researching possible actions that the audience can take. Researching laws, procedures, organizations, etc., to find different possible actions, being creative, and putting in time and effort are things that will increase your credibility and the meaningfulness of your call to action. Your audience wants to know that what they do is likely to be effective and you make the case for that by picking options that best fit your audience, occasion, and purpose and explaining them effectively.

CALL TO ACTION

The call to action in a speech is inviting your audience to avail themselves of an opportunity you provide for them to join you in participating in an action related to your topic or issue that both you and they believe will help create meaningful and effective change.