LESSON 12: ARGUMENT COMMUNICATION

GROUP 5

JOHN LERIS DEMILLO

JHOSUA VICTORIANO
Argument Communication

 Arguments are claims backed by reasons that are supported by evidence. There are five
highly relevant characteristics of argument: Argumentation is a social process. Having
an argument involves two or more individuals responding to one another's claim and
support for such a claim.

Argumentative Personality
 Argumentative people feel more than just anger or frustration. They experience a lot of
complicated, variable emotions, and don't know how to analyze and regulate them.
They are less comfortable with emotions in general, and most importantly, they are less
self-aware.
I've been writing a personality column for Natural Health, which gives me some insight into
various personalities every month. Here's some insight into The Argumentative Personality.
Does that sound like someone you know about?
Do you feel like any of the people you know enjoy arguing just for the sake of arguing? You may
be right. Although some people want to discuss concepts and views, others argue out of habit –
they can't help themselves, and they're going to create a stir over the most insignificant stuff,
just to cause controversy. This can push those around them up the wall, because they're almost
always on the defensive, even over what would seem to be the most trivial stuff. Get to know
the argumentative personality - A friend, colleague, or relative who's going to find fault with
you or a situation just to involve you in apparently meaningless verbal sparring matches.

Negatives of being Positive of being

around argumentative around argumentative
personality person personality person

• Habitual ‘argument stokers’ can drive you
crazy, especially when you live or work with
them; it’s hard to have a conflict-free
conversation with them, even about trivial
matters.
 Being consistently at the mercy of an
Argumentative Personality can help build
motivation to stand up for yourself.
 We can learn debate techniques from
How do I deal with the Argumentative Personality?
 It takes lots of energy to defend yourself and maintain self-esteem when you have to
deal with a person that sees you as the source of wrongdoing. Here are some
suggestions on how to maintain your sanity when working or living with an
argumentative person:

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PERSONALITY AND COMMUNICATION

 ARGUMENTATIVE PERSONALITY ARGUMENTATIVE COMMUNICATION

Argumentative Personality experience more Argumentative communication is considered

than resentment or annoyance. They feel a lot to be a type of assertiveness since, while all
of complex variable feelings, and they don't argumentation is assertive, not all
know how to analyze and control them. assertiveness is argumentative.

Arguementative Communication
We must not be mistaken thinking that argumentative communication is
communication of an argumentative person, meaning arguing and fighting with others. In
everyday life humans make decisions that decisively affect their future, individual and
collective. They: vote in crucial issues; decide to adopt (or not) a set of global measures to
preserve the environment; decide to start a certain medical treatment that has an uncertain
outcome; switch off a machine supporting the life system of someone in deep coma; decide
that someone is guilty and put that person in jail for years; choose (if they can) to pay a huge
sum for their children’s education having the free public education at their disposal; buy and
sell all sort of things and services. They do all that, and more, believing that they are serving
their own best interests, or of their families, or of some group.

Argumentation Theory
Communication is very important for human beings. In fact, through communication the human
beings begin to express their thoughts and thus played a good role in our evolution. The
speaker will share the details when speaking, and the listener will listen to it. Here the listener
must be able to discern reliable facts from lies and treachery. The listener must be able to filter
the messages and must be careful about the information he/she receives.

Stephen Toulmin’s structure of Argumentation

Stephen Toulmin’s structure of Argumentation Stephen Toulmin an English philosopher and
logician has come up with the elements of arguments which generate categories through which
an argument can be evaluated.

 Claim

 Ground

 Warrant

 Backing

 Qualifier

 Rebuttal

Claim - It's nothing but a comment. It shall be addressed to the speaker or listener
in order to acknowledge the knowledge as valid. If anyone asks you to do
anything, you're not going to agree to do what they want.

Ground - Is the logic behind the argument, the facts used to convince the listener,
and the evidence of the reasoning. Knowledge can be a very effective factor of
persuasion here.

Warrant - It justifies the argument by making the ground that it is acceptable. A

warrant could be a small assertion or a follow-up claim. It may be true, tacit or
unexplained.
Backing - When the case is backed, it provides more support to the warrant.
Qualifier - It limits the breadth of the argument. They generally use words like
most,' 'usually,' 'always,' and sometimes.' The reservation is another alternative
to qualifying. It is a word that may be used to state that the argument is wrong.

Rebuttal - There can still be counter-arguments even in a perfectly defined

argument. The rebuttal can be made during the early stages of the presentation
or by a lengthy speech.

Argumentative Communication
Argumentative communication is considered to be a type of assertiveness since, while all
argumentation is assertive, not all assertiveness is argumentative. Here, argumentative people
support views on divisive topics and verbally attack the conflicting viewpoints of others. In a
phrase, this is the underlying motivation to argue. It is necessary to remember, however, that it
is the role of the person under attack in argumentativeness, not the individual.

Hostile Communication
Moving from positive communication to destructive communication, aggression tries to kill the
other. Hostile people use verbal and non-verbal messages to convey irritability, negativity,
frustration, and distrust. They seem to have a fast temper, a little patience, a mood, and easily
become exasperated. They have a propensity to pessimism about results that others find more
desirable, fail to comply, and are antagonistic to authority, laws, and social norms. Hostility has
been explained as "an attitude, a dislike of a particular person, object, or issue, accompanied by a desire
to see this target injured or even destroyed." People demonstrating predispositions to hostility are often
classified as having hostile personalities.

Aggresive Communication
Aggressive contact is a subset of aggression and is often considered a characteristic of
neuroticism. Verbal's Aggressivity implies a propensity to criticize the self-concepts of others
rather than, or in addition to, their views on issues. Research has shown three major areas of
assault on self-concept: group membership

In addition to self-concept attacks, verbal abuse involves attacks of competence, or attacks on

the ability of another person to do anything (you can't do it right), That can still hurt, cause
discomfort and humiliation.

Contructive Communication
In the sense of offering and receiving positive input and criticism, it is important to consider the
distinctions between assertive/argumentative communication and hostile/aggressive
communication. The fundamental difference is the position of the attack. When attacks are
based on the status of an individual, they fall under the category of assertive or argumentative.

Argumentative Writting
A lot of people are struggling with getting their ideas and feelings on paper and sending a letter.
This is an ability that needs to be mastered and exercised. With the rise of email and working
with people in remote areas, direct and convincing communication is becoming increasingly
essential. Perhaps the biggest problem with this is that when you write, you sometimes don't
get a second chance to make a different argument. You get one shot, and if you lose your
reader, it's hard to get them back. That's why you need to pick your words carefully and deliver
your points in a style, manner and sequence that best fits the message you're sending out.

The Rhetorical Triangle is a useful way of formulating your

thoughts and presenting your position.
Rheotic
Rhetoric is the ancient art of using words to inform people. If you use it well, your audience can
quickly understand what you're saying, and they'll be inspired by your message. By taking the
time to learn how rhetorical arguments are formulated and delivered, you can greatly develop
your writing and make your points concise, efficient and accurate.

Applying the principles of rhetoric helps you structure an argument so the truth becomes immediately
apparent to your audience. With the Rhetorical Triangle approach, we focus on the three things that
have the greatest impact on an argument:

 The writer.
 The audience.
 The context.

These three elements form the points of the Rhetorical Triangle:

According to this approach, these three factors determine the persuasiveness of your argument. Your
writing – and any other form of communication – needs to take all three into consideration.

The Writer
Both consciously or subconsciously, the audience needs to know what your communication
motivations are. If you don't make it clear why you're presenting facts, some people would
think that you're not fully candid, or that you're hiding anything. Members of your audience
should ask themselves:

The Audience
You need to understand the audience as you talk, in writing or orally. Knowing who you're
referring about helps you avoid using technical jargon when talking to lay people, or "dumbing
down" material if the message is intended for professionals. Things to be considered include:

The Context
Finally, your audience analyzes the content and circumstances of your communication.

The three points of the Rhetorical Triangle relate directly to the three classic appeals you should
consider when communicating.

 Ethos – Building trust by establishing your credibility and authority (Writer).

 Pathos – Appealing to emotion by connecting with your audience through
their values and interests (Audience).
 Logos – Appeal to intelligence with well-constructed and clearly argued
ideas (Context).

Using the Rhetorical Triangle

When preparing a written document, speech or presentation you should first consider the three
elements required for effective persuasion. If your communication is lacking in any of the three areas,
then you'll decrease the overall impact your message will have on your audience.
Argumentative vs persuasive

Persuasive Discussion - the author focuses mostly on using emotions to convince the audience
of their claim.
Argumentative Discussion - the author uses facts to back up their claim. Argumentative
discussion does not mean that the author is angry. There is no anger in an argumentative
discussion as defined above.