Different Types of Arguments - Explore The Power of Persuasion

Different Types of Argumentative Essay 

Argumentative essays are a common way to present and address arguments on specific issues. They are especially popular among students. 

There are three common types of argumentative essays based on their structure: the Classical (aka Aristotelian), Rogerian, and Toulmin. Each type follows a slightly different argumentative essay outline, allowing for varied approaches to presenting and supporting arguments.

Let’s take a look at each of them with examples.

Aristotelian Argument

The Aristotelian or Classical argument is a widely used argumentative approach used for centuries. 

Developed by Aristotle, a classical argumentative essay consists of an introduction presenting the claim, followed by arguments and evidence that support the claim. It also allows for counter arguments. These arguments are presented one-by-one, ensuring proper flow and clarity.

See our argumentative essay based on the Aristotelian approach to get a better idea!

Rogerian Argument

The Rogerian argument was inspired by psychologist Carl Rogers’ work in conflict resolution and mediation theory. 

Unlike other forms of argumentation, this approach does not require you to be overly persuasive for your side. Instead, it encourages dialogue between two conflicting positions in order to find common ground between them. 

This type of essay attempts to show and understand both sides before presenting an opinion or conclusion. It attempts to create a more balanced view on a topic while considering all angles before reaching a decision.  

Here’s an example:

Toulmin Argument

The Toulmin model of argumentative writing was developed by philosopher Stephen Toulmin.

This model allows you to explain complex topics in detail while still offering room for debate or disagreement from readers.  It focuses on:

• Clarifying your claim
• Providing data and evidence that supports it
• Presenting the warrants and backing that provides further evidence for the claim
• Explaining qualifiers that offer exceptions or limits on the claim
• Finally, mentioning the opposing arguments and providing rebuttals against opposing claims.

Take a look at this Toulmin argumentative essay to see how it looks like in practice:

Types of Arguments in Philosophy & Logic

Argumentation is not just another skill that you learn in school – it’s a science, developed throughout history by philosophers and thinkers. Knowing how different types of arguments work is the basis of modern knowledge, learning, and research. 

There are three major types of arguments from this perspective, including:

• Deductive arguments
• Inductive arguments
• Abductive arguments

Deductive Arguments

Deductive arguments are all about reasoning from general truths to specific cases. 

They go something like this: premise 1 + premise 2 = conclusion. Basically, if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true. 

For example, 

See how that works? 

The conclusion logically follows from the premises. The major premise establishes a general principle (All cats have fur), while the minor premise provides a specific instance (Stinky is a cat).

The conclusion, then, necessarily follows from the premises. The truth of the conclusion is guaranteed by the truth of the premises.

Inductive Arguments

Inductive arguments are a kind of reasoning where conclusions are drawn based on evidence, patterns, or observations. These go from specific cases to more general conclusions. 

In inductive reasoning, when claims are true, the conclusion becomes probably true. For example, 

In this example, the conclusion is drawn based on specific instances (eating strawberries in the past) and generalizing from those instances to reach a probable conclusion about the strawberries bought today.

However, note that unlike deductive reasoning, inductive arguments do not guarantee the truth of the conclusion, but rather infer high probability.

Abductive Arguments

Abductive arguments are a bit different than deductive and inductive arguments. They focus less on facts and more on explanations for why things happen or how they got there. 

Abductive reasoning goes from observed facts to forming hypotheses as to why those facts exist or how they were derived in the first place. 

For example, 

In this case, the conclusion is based on observation—the clouds gathering in the sky. But again it isn't guaranteed that the conclusion is true or false.

There could always be some other explanation for why these phenomena occurred.

Wanna learn more? Take a look at this video to learn about these types of arguments

Types of Argument Claims

A claim or proposition is the main assertion or point you put forward that expresses your position. There are different types of claims depending on their content, or what exactly you are arguing about.

Let's explore 5 types of argument claims:

• Factual Claims: These claims assert objective information that can be proven or disproven through evidence and data.
• Causal Claims: These claims assert cause-and-effect relationships between phenomena, explaining why something happens based on evidence or logical reasoning.
• Value Claims: Value or evaluation arguments express subjective judgments about the worth or importance of something based on personal or societal values. 
• Definitional Claims: These claims aim to establish or redefine the meaning or interpretation of a concept or term in the context of a debate or discussion.
• Policy Claims: These claims propose specific courses of action or advocate for particular policies or changes to address a problem or improve a situation.

Different Types of Fallacies in Arguments

Have you ever been in a debate and heard a statement that sounded so convincing. But then, upon closer inspection, you realized it was completely unfounded? 

That’s a fallacy – or a faulty argument. 

Fallacies are technical faults in arguments that make them weak. There are essentially two types of fallacies:

• Formal Fallacies: These are pure logical errors that occur in the structure or form of an argument. They make the argument invalid regardless of the truth of its premises.
• Informal Fallacies: These are errors in reasoning that occur due to the content or context of an argument. They involve mistakes in reasoning, language usage, or the presentation of evidence.

Informal fallacies are a lot more common and harder to catch and avoid than formal ones. However, to make a strong argument, you must avoid both.

Let’s take a look at some of the most common informal fallacies.

Ad Hominem

Ad hominem—or “argument against the person”— is when somebody tries to invalidate another person's argument. They do it by attacking their character instead of refuting their ideas. 

It’s an appeal to emotion rather than logic and is often seen as an attempt to distract from the real issue. 

For example, someone says

This statement has nothing to do with the actual argument. Instead attempts to discredit your opponent based on his behavior (or lack thereof). 

Strawman Argument

A strawman argument is when somebody misrepresents another person's position in order to make it easier to attack. In other words, they set up a “straw man” version of their opponent's argument. Then proceed to knock it down with ease.

This type of fallacy is often seen in political debates when a politician takes their opponents' stance out of context in order to make them look foolish or uninformed. 

For example, 

Of course, candidate A never said anything like that—but candidate B still gets points for making it sound like they did! 

Appeal To Ignorance

An appeal to ignorance occurs when somebody claims that something must be true. Because there is no evidence proving otherwise. 

This type of argument relies on ignorance rather than logic. It falls apart quickly once facts are introduced into the discussion. 

For example, If someone says

This would be an example of an appeal to ignorance since there is no evidence either way as to whether or not aliens exist.  

False Dilemma Fallacy

The false dilemma fallacy is one of the most commonly used fallacies out there. It is where someone presents two choices as if they are the only possible options. When in reality there could be more than two. 

This is usually done to support an opinion or idea by simplifying it down to two extreme outcomes. One being desirable and one being undesirable—with no middle ground. 

For example, 

This is a false dilemma. Because there may be other policies that could be better for the country than either of those two options presented. 

Slippery Slope Fallacy

The slippery slope fallacy is another common fallacy that states that taking a certain action will lead to catastrophic results. It happens while ignoring any potential positive outcomes or steps in between mentioned action and the ultimate result.

An example of this would be 

There are numerous possible outcomes between allowing people to play video games and everyone becoming addicted. Therefore this statement is an example of the slippery slope fallacy because it ignores all those possibilities. 

Circular Argument

A circular argument occurs when someone uses the conclusion they want to reach as part of the evidence for why it should be reached in the first place. 

An example of this would be 

Stating that guns are dangerous does not provide sufficient evidence for why stricter laws should be passed. Rather it simply reiterates what needs to be proven already. 

Therefore, this statement constitutes a circular argument because it does not provide evidence for why something should occur. 

Hasty Generalization

Hasty generalization is when you draw a conclusion based on an insufficient amount of evidence. This type of fallacy usually happens when we don’t have enough information to make an accurate judgment. 

For example, 

Red Herring Fallacy

The red herring fallacy is when someone introduces irrelevant information into an argument in order to distract from the actual issue at hand. 

It’s important not to get so caught up in these distracting elements that you forget what you were actually arguing about! 

For example, 

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!

Order Now

Causal Fallacy

This occurs when someone assumes a cause-and-effect relationship where none exists. 

For example, 

It’s important to be able to differentiate between correlation and causation in order to avoid this fallacy. Just because two things happen at the same time doesn’t necessarily mean that one caused the other. 

Fallacy of Sunk Costs

This fallacy occurs when someone continues investing in something that isn’t yielding results. They are doing so just because they have already invested so much into it. 

For example, 

It is important to recognize when a situation is not going your way and be willing to move on from it. Instead of wasting more time and energy on something that won't yield results. 

Appeal to Authority

This fallacy occurs when someone tries to use an authority figure or expert. They use it as proof of something without any supporting evidence or logical reasoning. 

For example, if someone says

They are simply relying on the fact that the professor said it so it must be true. Don’t forget that even experts can make mistakes! 

Always ask for proof before accepting someone's opinion as fact just because they have authority or expertise in a certain area. 

Equivocation

Equivocation is one of the most commonly used fallacies. It occurs when someone uses the same word with different meanings throughout an argument. 

For instance,

The word "light" is used first to describe weight and then to describe brightness. The equivocation fallacy arises from the shift in meaning of the word "light".

Appeal to Pity Fallacy

This form of persuasive rhetoric takes advantage of people's emotions rather than relying on logic or facts. 

It occurs when someone attempts to convince you by appealing to your sympathy or compassion. Instead of presenting any real evidence or data that supports their position. 

For example, 

Since there are other solutions available besides repealing gun control laws. 

Bandwagon Fallacy

Finally, the Bandwagon Fallacy is a type of logical fallacy where someone attempts to persuade you by claiming that everyone else believes something or does something so you should too. 

For instance, if someone said

It doesn't matter what other people think; only your own opinion matters in this situation. 

All in all, this blog gives an overview of different types of arguments commonly used. Understanding these various kinds of argumentative techniques can help you effectively argue your point of view! With this knowledge in hand, you will be well-equipped to make your case in any debate or essay.  

If you’re still not sure how to present your argument effectively, let our professional argumentative writer do it for you.

With our exceptional argumentative essay help, you are guaranteed to get high-quality and well-structured arguments that will leave a lasting impression. 

Just submit your request to our paper writing service, and we will handle the rest. Get in touch with us today and place your order now!