[Author’s Name]
[Institution’s Name]
Essay on Toulmin's model of argumentation
Argumentation is a phenomenon we are confronted with daily. We argue all the time for our own views and we react continually to oral or written argumentation put forward by others. Apart from being a verbal activity, argumentation is also a social activity directed at other people. On top of that, it is a rational activity aimed at defending a standpoint in such a way that it is acceptable to a reasonable judge.
A person who argues something starts - rightly or wrongly - from the assumption that there is an explicit or implicit difference of opinion with regard to the acceptability of a certain standpoint. By putting forward the constellation of propositions which constitutes the argumentation, the speaker or writer attempts to convince the listener or reader that the standpoint at issue is acceptable (Trapp, Schuetz, 1990).
Taking these observations as our point of departure, we can describe the subject-matter of the study of argumentation in the following way: Argumentation is a verbal, social and rational activity aimed at convincing a reasonable judge of the (in)acceptability of a standpoint by advancing a certain constellation of propositions which is designed to justify (or refute) the standpoint (Farrell, 1993).
This definition does justice to the 'process-product ambiguity' of the word 'argumentation': it not only refers to the activity of advancing reasons but also to the shorter or longer text those results from it. In general the context will make clear which of the two the intended meaning is.
In argumentation there is always an explicit or implicit appeal to reasonableness, but this does, of course, not mean that each argumentation is indeed reasonable. In practice, an argumentation can be lacking in all kinds of respects. It is the task of argumentation theorists to determine which soundness criteria should be satisfied in the argumentation for the argumentation to be called 'reasonable'...................
