Here is a sample Toulmin argumentation. The example
provi ded wil l rela tiv el y he lp you get a cle ar er
understanding of how this technique works.
"Smoking in Public Places Should be Banned"
Smoking in public places should be banned (claim) because it
puts other people, especially children and pregnant women, at
risk of breathing smoke from cigarettes (ground). Smoking in
public places also endangers people who have respiratory
ailments (ground). Recent studies show that almost (qualifier)
80% of those who ingest secondhand smoke from public
smokers have a higher risk of getting respiratory problems than
smokers themselves (data).
Banning an act that causes problems to innocent civilians is
helpful in many ways (warrant). If smoking in public places is
banned, we actually reduce or totally eradicate the danger of
putting non-smokers at risk of developing lung and heart
problems (backing statement). Moreover, if we ban smoking in
public places, we also stop the smokers from further increasing
their chances of acquiring health problems for themselves
(backing statement).
While it can be said that not all people who smoke in public
areas are always causing harm to others, it remains a fact that
smoking per se is a cause of health problems (rebuttal). It is not
enough to say that the size of affected people are relatively just a
small fraction; plenty or few, one person put at risk is more than
enough (rebuttal). It is only the case that smoking in public
places, therefore, should be banned.
Here is a sample Toulmin argumentation. The example
provi ded wil l r el a ti vel y h elp yo u ge t a c lea re r
understanding of how this technique works.
"Smoking in Public Places Should be Banned"
Smoking in public places should be banned (claim) because it
puts other people, especially children and pregnant women, at
risk of breathing smoke from cigarettes (ground). Smoking in
public places also endangers people who have respiratory
ailments (ground). Recent studies show that almost (qualifier)
80% of those who ingest secondhand smoke from public
smokers have a higher risk of getting respiratory problems than
smokers themselves (data).
Banning an act that causes problems to innocent civilians is
helpful in many ways (warrant). If smoking in public places is
banned, we actually reduce or totally eradicate the danger of
putting non-smokers at risk of developing lung and heart
problems (backing statement). Moreover, if we ban smoking in
public places, we also stop the smokers from further increasing
their chances of acquiring health problems for themselves
(backing statement).
While it can be said that not all people who smoke in public
areas are always causing harm to others, it remains a fact that
smoking per se is a cause of health problems (rebuttal). It is not
enough to say that the size of affected people are relatively just a
small fraction; plenty or few, one person put at risk is more than
enough (rebuttal). It is only the case that smoking in public
places, therefore, should be banned.