What We Have Here is a Failure to Argue

I've often encountered students who, during a debate on a moral issue, would raise their hands and then say "I'd argue that . . ." followed by a statement of their opinion. "I'd argue that abortion is always wrong" or "I'd argue that people shouldn't eat meat" or something similar.

When my students did this, my response was always the same. I'd say . . .

"Go ahead."

Most of the time the student would just sit there staring at me, having no idea why I'd said what I just said. I'd then point out that simply saying that you "would argue" that a particular belief is true is not actually arguing that the particular belief is true. I'd tell the student that he or she was merely asserting that a belief is true, while replacing the word "believe" or "claim" with "argue." I'd explain that this rhetorical trick makes an assertion seem like an argument, and even convinces many people that they are arguing, but that such people simply are not
arguing.

I'd further explain that an argument always contains (at least) two propositions. Arguments always have a conclusion, which is the proposition that is supposed to be accepted as a result of the argument's force, and a premise which provides the reason for accepting a conclusion.

I'd then repeat my earlier instruction. "Go ahead."


In this article, Jonathan Chait makes pretty short work of the state of anti gay-marriage argumentation. He points out that the statement "I believe marriage should be between a man and a women" is a version of the "I'd argue . . ." non-argument. His analysis comes to the following excerpt, which I think is dead on.

"The line 'I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman' is an expression of that sensibility--a reflection of unease rather than principle. As people face up to the fact that opposing gay marriage means disregarding the happiness of the people most directly (or even solely) affected by it, most of us come around. Good ideas don't always defeat bad ideas, but they usually, over time, defeat non-ideas."

Well said.

Joe H.