English

Nederlands

English

Nederlands

Appearance

Patterns and Schemes of Arguments ​

Argumentation Schemes ​

Argumentation schemes are schematizations or templates of common types of arguments. The idea behind studying these schemes is that familiarizing yourself with these patterns of reasoning will help you to identify and critical assess instances of these arguments when you encounter them.

The schemes help with critical assessment in a number of ways. They can help you identify when arguments are well formed, and how they differ from fallacies of similar appearance. (On this point the Rationale Schemes have been specifically designed to help with). The schemes also indicate what information is required to make such a move in a debate, as they outline what premises are in need of defense. Furthermore, they can help you to identify what challenges can be legitimately made against the argument. Douglas Walton’s set is particularly helpful in this regard because it provides a number of critical questions for almost every argumentation scheme.

Below are 4 sets of argumentation schemes. The first has been designed by Rationale to be as clear as possible in argument map form. The others are from the work academics in the fields of informal logic and argument analysis. The references to there work are provided on their individual pages, and are well worth reading if you want to gain a thorough understanding of argument schemes.

Rationale Argumentation Schemes ​

These schemes have been developed to help argument mappers create well formed maps of common arguments. An attempt has been made to ensure that these schemes contain no enthymematic premises. (If you think you notice any logical mistakes please contact us). Examples are provided to help make the abstract structure clear.

Also, when using these schemes keep in mind that the best way to word the claims may vary from case to case. So long as the essential content of the proposition remains the same it is quite ok to change the wording.

Argumentation Schemes

Walton's Argumentation Schemes ​

The Argumentation Schemes below are taken from Douglas Walton’s book Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. If you are interested in using these schemes I would suggest that you read Walton’s book, as their utility may not be apparent without the background theory concerning presumptive reasoning.

Critical Questions appear in note boxes, and are labeled with the question mark icon pictured below.

The critical questions are numbered as they appear in Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning, for easy reference.

First some examples of critical questions for reasoning schemes from Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. These questions help assess the strength and validity of an argument:

Example: Argument Based on Expert Opinion ​

Scheme:

  • Person A claims that X is true.
  • Person A is an expert in the relevant field.
  • Therefore, X is probably true.

→ Critical Questions:

  1. Is A truly an expert in this field?
  2. What exactly does A say?
  3. Is A trustworthy?
  4. Is what A says consistent with what other experts say?
  5. Is there evidence that A is biased?
  6. Is A’s claim based on evidence or experience?

Example: Argument Based on Analogy ​

Scheme:

  • Situation A is similar to situation B.
  • What applies to A also applies to B.

→ Critical Questions:

  1. To what extent are A and B really similar?
  2. Are the relevant properties of A also present in B?
  3. Are there important differences that undermine the analogy?

Example: Practical Reasoning ​

Scheme:

  • Goal G is desirable.
  • Action A leads to G.
  • Therefore, A should be carried out.

→ Critical Questions:

  1. Is G truly a desirable goal?
  2. Is A the best way to achieve G?
  3. Are there negative consequences of A?
  4. Are there better alternatives than A?

Argumentation Schemes ​

Pollock's Argumentation Schemes ​

The Argumentation Schemes below are from John Pollock’s book Cognitive Carpentry: A Blueprint for How to Build a Person.

Katzav and Reed's Argumentation Schemes ​

The Argumentation Schemes below are from the work of Joel Katzav and Chris Reed. Their article On Argumentation Schemes and the Natural Classification of Arguments outlines their view concerning Argumentation Schemes.

Classic Patterns of Argument ​

Simple Inductive Schemes ​

Simple Deductive Schemes ​

Syllogisms - Cattegoral ​

Syllogisms with Venn Diagrams

Classic Arguments ​

Classic Fallacies ​