Communication 209- Argumentation- Final Exam- Fall 2014

Kelsey Greenwood
9:30 class
Complete the following questions as thoroughly as you can. Save the document with your name
and class section in the file name.

Short Answer- Answer the following questions completely. Aim for at least 4-6 sentences.
1) Name the three parts to an argument, explaining their function, and how each connects
with the other parts. In your opinion, which part is the most important? Explain.
The three parts are claim, supporting material, and a warrant. A claim is your
thesis/the entire point of your argument. Supporting material is the evidence you use to
support your claim. A warrant is an interpretation, generally one sentence that explains
the relationship between the supporting material and the claim. The claim is the most
important part because it is the sole purpose of the argument. Without the claim, there
would be no need for evidence or a warrant.

2) Name the five stock issues and explain the meaning of each. The debates in class have
focused on two issues in particular. Which ones? Are there any that are hardly relevant or
almost irrelevant to most controversial topics? If so, explain why.
Stock issues are 5 basic categories of information that must be provided in every
debate round. They are inherency, harms, plan/significance, solvency, and topicality.
Inherency keeps a harm from being solved. Harms are advantages and disadvantages of
the affirmative. Plans/significance establish the importance of the harms and how the
affirmative plans on fixing them. Solvency is the ability of the affirmative or the negative
counterplan to solve the problem. Topicality is the opening statement, stance, topic, and
scope of the affirmative. Based on what I learned in class about the structure of a debate,
I believe we focused most on the harms and the plan. Our texting and driving example

Communication 209- Argumentation- Final Exam- Fall 2014

Kelsey Greenwood
9:30 class
really focused on the advantages and disadvantages and then we had a plan and
counterplan. I think the most important stock issue is the harms because they are really
what persuades the audience that there is an issue that needs to be changed.

3) List four logical fallacies and explain why they demonstrate poor reasoning. We have
discussed two fallacies in class that were not included in the PBS Idea Channel video, but
were demonstrated in the Greek Life debate held on campus. Include and describe those
as well.
Some logical fallacies are ad hominem, over generalizations, slippery slope,
strawman, false dilemma, and the authority fallacy. Ad hominem is a personal attack on
the debater, not the argument. Over generalizations are when you make hasty judgments
based on insufficient evidence, which can lead to false conclusions. Slippery slope fallacy
is when someone argues that one event will eventually cause another extreme event
without sufficient evidence. Strawman fallacy is when a debater over simplifies an
argument to discredit it without actually arguing any point. False dilemma is limiting
choices as the only options when in reality there are others. The authority fallacy is when
people make the assumption that the debater has authority and must be right.

4) Christopher Lasch explains the importance of public debate a as key component of

democracy. What reasons does he give for this claim? What, in Lasch's view, has replaced public
debate in America? Do you agree with him? Draw from media discussions surrounding a recent
event to support your answer.

Communication 209- Argumentation- Final Exam- Fall 2014

Kelsey Greenwood
9:30 class
We need debate in democracy so that we can ask the right questions and not just accept
information passively. The press has replaced debate because it gives an abundance of
information. Professionalism in journalism took over debate forum. I dont necessarily agree that
the press has taken the place of debate. The press could definitely foster debate if it chose to,
however; it is professionalism that has taken the place of debate. One example is how the press is
portraying the ferguson case. The press itself is very biased and is only delivering one side of the
story. They leave out important information and people just accept it. They do not question it. It
is important that the press release both sides so that a decent argument can be formed. Bias is a
huge problem with this case.

5) What is a "turn"? Explain how it works in debate, and give an example of a turn from either
one of our mock debates or one of the in class debates from the latter half of the semester.
Include an explanation of the difference between a link turn and an impact turn.
A turn is an argument that proves an argument the other side has made is in fact support
for one's own side. Turns work when a debater takes their opponents point and flips it into being
an advantage for his or her own side. One example of a turn we used in class is from the texting
and driving argument. The affirmatives turn was that friends wont get mad if I text them
beforehand and say Im driving. Impact turns turn on the outcome, but link turns are better
because they turn a point into their advantage.
Medium Answer- These questions will require a minimum of two paragraphs.

1) Why is research useful for making an argument? Explain how different topics might require
different standards for quality research. For example, some factors or attributes of evidence
might matter more in an argument about the price of oil than an argument about the moral/ethical

Communication 209- Argumentation- Final Exam- Fall 2014

Kelsey Greenwood
9:30 class
grounds for eminent domain. We've seen that some styles of competitive debate (i.e. British
Parliamentary) are less evidence driven. Make a case for the importance of evidence in debate
(whether competitive or "real life") and describe what you deem to be the ideal balance of
arguments based in evidence from external sources and arguments drawing from a debater's
individual reasoning.
Researching is important when constructing an argument. Research can give ideas for a
thesis or claim. Not to mention, research is where evidence to support these claims comes from.
Different topics require different types of research. For instance, a topic such as the death penalty
requires scientific research and studies. One would need to research processes and outcomes.
Another topic can be one of opinion, rather than science. If the base of an argument is opinion,
one might want to research public opinion polls and draw from individual experiences.
In any argument, whether it be competitive or real, evidence is an important key of
persuasion. Not all people accept what they are told blindly. Some people need substantial
evidence before they believe something. I think the ideal balance is somewhere in between
external sources and individual reasoning. I think it should be fifty/fifty. I can relate to individual
experiences and I can easily follow individual reasoning. If an argument was only made from
individual reasoning, I may deem it as bias and based on opinion and not so easily agree with it.
If an argument was nothing but facts, I would probably not be as easily persuaded because it
could lack elements like ethos, pathos, and logos that really grab an audiences attention.

Communication 209- Argumentation- Final Exam- Fall 2014

Kelsey Greenwood
9:30 class
2) We've spent time in class discussing the controversies surrounding "switch side debate".
Summarize both the case for and against switch side debate. This question concerns the value of
advocacy skills developed within competitive debates, and the difference between advocacy with
personal conviction and advocacy as a professional vocation. Explain this difference and how
switch side debate impacts the different motivations for advocacy. Explain your own views on
both of the dispute concerning switch side debate, and the dispute between personal and
professional advocacy (you need not try to agree with me in order to receive credit for this
question. Even if you are in between or undecided, I'll be looking for your explanation for your
position).

Greene and Hicks talk about switch side debating, which is having students argue the
affirmative and negative on a debate resolution. They argue that debating both sides enhances
critical thinking skills. It also gives the debater a chance to take a new perspective by learning
and advocating a position they might not agree with within a given debate round. They argue that
switch side debate can be educational. Greene and Hicks say switch-sides methodology
contributes to the creation of exceptional subjects whose personal convictions are neatly
separated from their public statements and who therefore contribute to the ideological
maintenance of American exceptionalism.
Opponents of switch side debate say that it has no ethical foundation. They say that these
debates lack real clash. They argue that it does not allow one to pick a side. There is no personal
advocacy in switch side debate. It is all impersonal, and unethical.

Communication 209- Argumentation- Final Exam- Fall 2014

Kelsey Greenwood
9:30 class
I personally, dont care either way. I suppose that I would be for it, if it is needed to get
the job done. I think that people who argue what they believe are generally more passionate
debaters, however, that does not take away from a debate where the person isnt advocating what
they believe. Their debates can still be just as good. I see both sides to the argument. But overall,
I think personal advocacy means more than professional advocacy. I think switch side debating
could be used as a good educational tool, however, there is more value in a debate that the
debater believes in.
Long Answer- These questions will require an essay response. Aim for 2-4 double spaced pages

1) Throughout the class, you've explored topics relevant to various spheres, from issues relevant
to the students and faculty at UMW, to complex debates of national and global concern. In those
debates, we've carefully explored the details involved in the competing stances and perspectives
on those issues, and demonstrated that simplistic reduction of most issues to "yes or no",
"republican or democrat", "affirmative or negative" does not reflect an adequate engagement
with the facts of the matter. Explain how your view on a topic discussed or debated in class has
changed after reviewing the various arguments and positions within the topic. This can be your
affirmative or negative topics, the in-class town hall topics, one of the debates watched either
inside or outside of class, or one of your classmates' debates. There is no "correct" influence to
gain from a debate. Many debates lead people to particular perspectives, while others lead the
audience to be more open and reflective to numerous conflicting perspectives. Describe your
own response to a debate of your choice.
My debate on the death penalty may not have really changed my opinion on the topic,
however it gave me more insight as to why I was against. Before my debate, the only support I
had for my position was that murdering someone who murdered makes us no better than the
criminal. After researching and conducting my debate, I had much more evidence to support my
claim and I even expanded my views on the topic. In creating the negative brief, I took a detailed
look at the other position, which helped me solidify my position even more.

Communication 209- Argumentation- Final Exam- Fall 2014

Kelsey Greenwood
9:30 class
I never once thought of how the death penalty could be applied unfairly. I thought that
our judicial system was pretty thorough, just, and fair. However, after doing some extended
research, I found that racism and prejudice still is applied in our system. I found that statistically
African-Americans were sentenced to death row more frequently than Caucasians. Another thing
that I researched and found out was that despite popular belief, the death penalty actually costs
taxpayers more than sentencing someone with life in prison. I also found that statistically, the
death penalty does not deter crime. These points really helped to open my eyes to the fact that
our court systems are using and inadequate technique.
On the other side of this debate, I learned a lot from doing the negatives brief. It was not
that I learned why the death penalty should be allowed, it was more so that I learned what it felt
to argue with myself. In creating this brief, instead of anticipating what another person was going
to say, I had to argue with myself and what I thought that I would say if I was in that persons
position. I actually found this to be quite frustrating; I thought that I couldnt win with either
side. In the end though, I was able to write a very polished debate and convince myself that my
affirmative was the right way to go.
What really happened in this debate was that instead of changing my views on the
position, I changed the reasons why I didnt agree with it altogether. I became more confident in
my position and beliefs. From the entire class and experience as a whole, I become a more
confident and knowledgeable speaker.

2) Fast forward ten to fifteen years from now. You've graduated from UMW and are now in your
ideal career (if you are not sure what that is, feel free to pick an option under review :) ). Depict
an example where you will have to convince someone (an employee, a customer/client, or your

Communication 209- Argumentation- Final Exam- Fall 2014

Kelsey Greenwood
9:30 class
superior) that you are correct and they are wrong. Explain the debate in question (the topic) and
develop your case, including the advantages and solvency mechanism. Anticipate your
opponent's disadvantages, possible counterplans, kritiks, and case arguments. Entertain the
various strengths and weaknesses of the arguments, and produce a closing rejoinder that
establishes why your case wins (why the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, why the case
solves better than the counterplan, etc.)
This question is rather easy for me to answer considering my ideal career is to be a family
attorney. My entire job will be based on argument. Every day that I step into the court room, I
will have to convince judge that my opponent is wrong and that I am correct. I will explain to
you a hypothetical divorce case.
My client, the father of, lets say Peyton, is filing for full custody against the mother, lets
say Angela. The father, lets say Brian, believes that Angela is an unfit mother and is toxic to
Peyton. While courts are generally sympathetic to the mother, it is my job to convince the job
that the father having full custody is in the best interest of the child. Angela and her lawyer, on
the other hand, believe that Brian is an unfit father and that Angela should have sole custody. It is
my responsibility to sway the judge to be in favor of my client.
The advantages the father has in this case are: he has steady income, a home, a support
network, and good schools within his district, and he is not mentally unstable like the mother.
The mothers only real advantage is that she is the mother, which makes my job even easier. The
mother has not held a steady job for more than three months, has proven she is mentally
unstable, has four warrants out for her arrest, and does not have a home of her own and cannot
afford one. The mother has proven her mental state is unstable by committing four hate crimes
against the father, and also by recorded, harassing phone calls and emails to my client and his
family. The disadvantage of the father is that the court is sympathetic to the mother.

Communication 209- Argumentation- Final Exam- Fall 2014

Kelsey Greenwood
9:30 class
My points that I will argue is that my client will harbor a safer environment for the child
and that he is more mentally capable of fostering growth and development for the child. My
evidence is the fact that there is adequate shelter, food, clothing, schooling, etc. that the father
can provide versus what the mother can provide. I will use the many harassing emails and phone
calls that my client and his family have recorded to prove that she is toxic and could potentially
lash out at the child. I will argue that my client deserves full custody of Peyton and that awarding
the mother any custody rights could potentially harm the child.
If compromise needed to be met, even though my case is pretty solid, I would argue that
my client get sole custody, and that the mother be granted supervised visitation rights. This way,
the mother still has contact with the child but will not be able to do but so much damage.