Main Points
Claims that undergrid and support our thesis statement
1/38
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Main Points | Claims that undergrid and support our thesis statement |
| Subpoints | Smaller assertions we make about the world in support of our main points. |
| Inartistic Forms of Proof | Types of evidence that exist in the world that the speaker can point to in their speech as support for their claims. |
| Definition | Established meaning and interpretation of a term (Inartistic) |
| Testimony | Public statement that a witness makes to describe a situation, event, or idea (Inartistic) |
| Quoted Testimony | Precise words of a witness |
| Expert Testimony | Persons trained in and/or credible to speak on the subject about the situation at hand |
| Sworn Testimony | Statement given by a witness under oath |
| Statistics | Scientifically significant points of data on a subject of public concern (Inartistic) |
| Laws, contracts, and oaths | Binding agreements and documents affirmed through law or the word of another person (Inartistic) |
| Precedent | Use of a previous successful finding or occurrence to justify how we should think of a similar contemporary event (Inartistic) |
| Narratives | Story that sheds light on a issue or exemplifies a point (Inartistic) |
| Narrative Cohearence | How well a story hangs together at a structure level |
| Narrative Fidelity | Degree to which the story fits into how the audience is currently understanding the world |
| Artistic Forms of Proof | Evidence that the speaker can create in the course of giving a speech to support their own claims |
| Logos | Presents their information in a clear and logical manner (Artistic) |
| Ethos | Credibility of the speaker- particularly their ethics, characteristics, and experiences (Artistic) |
| Pathos | Use of emotional appeals by speaker (Artistic) |
| Warrant | Form of reasoning that connects evidence to a claim |
| Induction | Reasoning that uses a number of specific cases to draw a general conclusion or claim |
| Deduction | General principle to reasons what happened in a particular case |
| Cause | Showing that a person, event, or object reasonably produced a change in the world |
| Analogy | Form of reasoning that works by identifying the same kind of relationship between multiple kinds of person, object, events, or items |
| Sign | Pointing to something that signifies the presence of something else |
| Unclear Arguments | Arguments that fail because the speaker does not clearly state their case in a manner the audience can follow |
| Unsupported Arguments | Speaker has not provided any/or enough quality support to make their claim successfully |
| Unethical Arguments | Speakers argument calls for or is done via unethical or immoral behavior |
| Arguments made on the Wrong Terms | Speaker makes a strong case, but in wrong context |
| Logical Fallacies | Unreasonable arguments that appear to be reasonable arguments |
| Ad Hominem | Attacking the person and not the argument |
| Bandwagon | Something should be done just because it is popular |
| Slippery Slope | Small and reasonable step will inevitably lead to the most severe and outlandish outcome |
| What-about-ism | Attempts to avoid criticism by suggesting the critic is actually just as guilty or wrong as speaker |
| False Dilemma | Present two options to the audience as their only possible choices when, in reality there are many actual choices the audience could make |
| False Cause | One event happened prior to another event, the first event must have directly caused the second event |
| Hasty Generalization | Sweeping claims based on one or two few examples |
| Red Herring | Introduces unrelated information into an argument to confuse or distract from the information that actually matters |
| Strawman | Speaker intentionally mischaracterizes the position of their opponent and then attacks their opponent for that position |