A Study Of Toulmin's Theoryand Its Application In Negotiational Argument

Toulmin's theory is considered as a tool for analyzing arguments arising in a process of justifying a claim.This dissertation studies argument and its application using Toulmin's Model as its research framework.It uses examples in the communication with government agencies as the case study.Three research questions are raised and discussed in detail: 1)To what extent could a claim be accepted by the challenger? 2)Are data(D),warrant(W)and qualifier(Q)all necessary steps to make a good argument?3)Should the claim in the argument be aligned with the goal of the counterpart especially when a request is being made?By using case studies from the communication with government,this dissertation validates Toulmin's theory,and proves that in reality,the most difficult part,more often than not,is how to get data and link the data with the warrant so that the claim will be more convincing.For the first question,the study has found that data(D),warrant(W)and qualifier(Q)and rebuttals(R)are required and in order to defend warrants,one may turn to a system of taxonomic classification,to a statute,to statistics from a census,and so forth.For the second question,the study has found that besides data(D),warrant(W)and qualifier(Q),one of the important steps of Toulmin's model is its provision for rebuttals(R),and dialectical logic indicates,we should see arguments as mutual exchanges of supporting and rebutting forces.For the third question,the study has found that the claim with the data should support some of the counterpart's goals and objective to make it accepted.Therefore,it is further suggested that,in reality,the data and claim in the argument should be aligned with the goal or interest of the counterpart when commitment or follow-up action is needed so that the participants could have a mutual interest in the outcome of a discussion.