Method of Madness

Word Count: 488

The Toulmin Method was first introduced in the 1958 book The Uses of Argument by Stephen Toulmin (Huillet p. 249). It is comprised of six elements; claim, reason(s), evidence, warrants, qualifiers, and rebuttal. By utilizing these six elements, a writer can create an articulate and thoughtful argument that someone may not agree with, but can still respect because they’ve done the work. Unfortunately, this does not happen in our everyday lives. For the most part, I find that people will institute a claim and reasons, skip right over the evidence, emit an eye roll as a qualifier, and have that rebuttal locked and loaded in their back pocket. Before we even begin an argument, we’re already thinking about our defense. Perhaps if we eschewed a bit more evidence, a rebuttal could be almost an afterthought.

Knowing the elements of the Toulmin method will definitely help me make arguments in the future; I don’t have any examples currently because I’ve just learned the method, and haven’t had an argument to make this week. However, I can say that in the past most of my arguments with my partner looked like this:

CLAIM

                                                                                    

BECAUSE, REASONS!

DEFENSE

I can definitely see how this method will also hinder the arguments people try to make with me. Now that I know the elements, it will be clear what is missing from people’s arguments.

Here’s an example of an argument my co-worker recently tried to make when I mentioned I wanted to stop using shampoo and only wash my hair with water:

Claim: If you don’t use shampoo all of your hair will fall out.

Reason: The hair follicle gets so clogged with oil and dirt that it forces the hair out.

Evidence: I went to cosmetology school.

Warrant: Things cannot be cleaned with just water.

Qualifiers: “I mean guess some people can.”

Rebuttal: (After I mentioned that my best friend has done this for 4 years, and have seen several people on YouTube that also do this) “Oh, well yea if you wash with hot water and massage your scalp that should work.” (How else does one wash hair?)

This argument was flawed from the beginning because not only does she not have a shred of evidence to back up her claim except that she went to cosmetology school, but she is also simply not credible. When I refuted her “evidence” with the fact that the hair industry only exists because of it’s ability to convince us of things we don’t need to truly be clean (like chemically engineered shampoo), and that it was literally their job at hair school to convince you of these same ideals, she shrugged her shoulders. I am more than willing to listen to someone’s argument; but when someone relies on “facts” that have no scientific backing and are simply rooted in capitalism, I’m not interested. At that point, you’re just a lobbyist for the hair industry.

Huillet, M.. (2015). Communicating Online. USA: McGraw-Hill Education.

Images courtesy of Google Images