ARGUMENTATION:How to RebuttalThe 3 criteria an argument must meet in order to be convincing:1)Time Order: The independent variable must come before the dependent variable in time. 2)Statistical Correlation: There must numbers that show a relationship between the two variables. Assumes point 1 true.3)Nonspurious: The relationship between the independent and dependent variable cannot be explained away by a 3rdfactor. This type of argument assumes points 1 and 2 are true.Structure of an ArgumentTaglineWarrantImpact*Each of these levels in an argument are grounds for attack. In other words, when you are building rebuttals, you can choose to attack either the tagline (the overall argument); the warrant (the specific evidence supporting the argument); or the impact (the effect of the argument). When you build your rebuttals, try to attack at least 2 levels for each major argument. Putting it Together:You can attack each level of an argument with any one of the three criteria for argumentation:1)Tagline: Is the Time order correct? Are the variables statistically related? Is it nonspurious?2)Warrants: Is the Time order correct? Are the variables statistically related? Is it nonspurious?3)Impact: Is the Time order correct? Are the variables statistically related? Is it nonspurious?*Based on simple mathematics, for every major argument, you could make 9 arguments rebutting it, assuming each of the 3 criteria only has 1 argument for it. In reality, there will be more. Thus, your rebuttal options are ENDLESSEasy Case Example: Attacking both the tagline and warrants. Tagline: Conservative pundit Stanley Kurtz claims that gay marriage helped to kill heterosexual marriage in Scandinavia.Warrants: 1)In 1989, Denmark legalized gay marriage.1)Eurostat'sjust-released marriage rates for 2001 show declines in Sweden and Denmark. Breaking it down Point by Point: Time Order1)The argument tries to establish time order by first presenting the date Denmark legalized gay marriage (1989) and then presenting data of a later drop in gay marriage.1)Is this an sufficient establishment of time order? No. First, the argument doesn’t give evidence suggesting that the drop in marriage rates didn’t start prior to 1989, or that the drop in marriage started immediately after 1989 and continued to 2001. *This line of argumentation is geared towards the warrantsTaglines for Counterarguments under Time Order:1)Evidence is unclear as to whether the drop in marriage rates is related to the legalization of gay marriageBreaking it down Point by Point: Statistically CorrelatedThe argument tries to establish statistical relevance by presenting the evidence in correlation with each other. First it states the independent variable: Gay Marriage legalization, and then it states the effect on the dependent variable: drop in marriage rates. Breaking it down Point by Point: Statistically CorrelatedProblems: 1)The evidence doesn’t tell us HOW LONG marriage rates have been dropping. If gay marriage truly reduced the number of marriages, then after 1989 (gay marriage legalization), the marriage rate should have shown a steady decline up to the present. The evidence does not tell us that. It only says that in 2001 marriage rates declined. 1)This could mean a number of statistical things. First, it could mean that gay marriage legalization lead to a decline in the marriage rate. 1)OR, it could be a statistical anomaly . What if the rate of marriage has actually increased from 1989 to 2000 and only in 2001 dropped? 1)OR, what if the rate of marriage stayed the same from 1989 to 2000 and only dropped in 2001? 1)Or, what if the rate of marriage has been declining since before 1989? All these statistical trends would invalidate the argument.Breaking it down Point by Point: Statistically CorrelatedTaglines for Rebuttal1) Not sufficient evidence to establish correlation.2) The evidence has other meanings3) Evidence does not establish statistical correlation4) Evidence could be a statistical anomaly5) Evidence does not represent long term trends in societyBreaking it down Point by Point: NonspuriousSO MANY POSSIBILITIES!!!!!1)Cultural Trends: There is a general trend in developed countries for couples to delay marriage. This is partly due to a growing disillusionment with marriage, particularly with the high rate of divorce. It could also be due to popularization of monogamous, long term relationships in couples who are not married (Angelina Jolie, Johnny Depp, Harrison Ford, etc). Also, there is less pressure for couples to get married. It is culturally acceptable for couples to have premarital sex and to cohabit before marriage, thus eliminating many of the benefits associated with marriage. (Yes, I am claiming that in the 1950s, people got married to have sex without being judged.)1)Tagline: Cultural Trends are more responsible for the decline marriage rates.Breaking it down Point by Point: Nonspurious1)Demographic Changes: In Europe, the birth rate has been steadily decreasing to the point where most European countries’ populations have stopped growing naturally and rely on immigration to boost population numbers. The trend in population is dates to the maturation of the baby boomer generation, which has proved much less prolific than the previous generation. This means that there are simply FEWER people at the marrying age. This means that it few marriages ought to be expected.1)Tagline: Europe’s demographic changes are more responsible for the decrease in marriages.Breaking it down Point by Point: Nonspurious1)ImpactofLegalAlternatives:JustliketheUS,EuropeoffersotherlegalalternativestomarriagesuchasCivilUnions.Forpeoplewhohaveideologicalobjectionstotraditionalmarriage,CivilUnionsarealegalalternativethatprovidesthesamelegalandtaxbenefitsasmarriagebutwithoutdelvingintothereligiousbackgroundbehinmarriage.Overtheyears,CivilUnionshavebecomemorepopular,particularlysinceCivilUnioncontractsaredrawnbytheparties(ratherthanthestate),thusenablingcouplestospecifythetermsoftheirrelationshiplegally.Thus,thoughmarriageratesmightbedecreasing,CivilUnionformationsareincreasingandatthatpoint,what’sthedifference?1)Tagline:GrowinguseofCivilUnionsinEuropeisresponsibleforlowermarriageratesOTHER AREAS in which to attack: Definitional Debate: Argument concerning the meaning of terms. While many people think this is a “cop out” debate, it is extremely important for a round. Example: With the last topic, there are several areas in which definitions could be an issue. What kind of marriage are we talking about? Heterosexual marriage? Homosexual marriage? Both Hetero and homosexual marriage? Marriages that last at least 6 years or all marriages that exist period? What about marriages that haven’t been legalized and are only spiritual (polygamy)? OTHER AREAS in which to attack: Why is Definitional Debate important? (THIS IS MY ATTEMPT AT IMPACTING!!) If the impact of the argument is “Gay marriage lowers the marriage rate. That leads to more children brought up without two parents. This leads to sociological, psychological, and behavior problems amounting to a future, dysfunctional population”, then it seems that defining marriage is very important. After all, if we are only talking about heterosexual marriages, then are the warrants accurate? What if heterosexual marriages have decreased but homosexual marriages increased to the point where the number of married couples in general is the same as before? Then the impact completely goes away. Or, if we are talking about all marriages, then how accurate is the impact? After all, just because you’re married doesn’t mean you stay that way and divorce would lead to the impact more efficiently than actual argument. OTHER AREAS in which to attack: Evidence Deconstruction: What is wrong with the warrants, other than the 3 criteria of argumentation? Though this type of argumentation can come off as cheap, when well done, it is generally very effective.Types:Attacking the Source: “The evidence is invalid because the source is either unspecified, inadequate, or non-existent”. I really think this is the cheapest argumentation available. Basically, you claim that a piece of evidence should be thrown out of the debate because it’s source isn’t good enough. Attacking the Methodology:“The evidence is invalid because it doesn’t accurately represent what it claims to”. This is the expensive hooker of evidence deconstruction. You can do this a number of ways. For example, when Fox News says “61% of Americans disapprove of gay marriage”, THINK ABOUT IT. Fox News surveys are conducted on its website. Fox News is a very conservative new station. Most likely, the only people surfing Fox News.com are conservatives who don’t agree with gay marriage. Thus, the sample that the Fox News survey was collected from is not a very good description of the American Population as a whole. OTHER AREAS in which to attack: Attacking the Use of the Evidence: “This evidence is used improperly and cannot validate this argument”. This one should be used with caution. It is not a blanket argument that works with everything, and there is no point in using it for evidence that don’t seem critical to the argument. You should only use this on warrants that are necessary for the argument to be true and in which you stand a chance at proving it’s wrongly used.Example: Gay couples shouldn’t have children. Only 1% of American children between the ages of 5 to 18 would like to have gay parents.Rebuttal: Is the opinion of children very relevant to the argument? Even if we assume that the statistic is accurate (and there hare huge problems with this stat), it’s not a very good warrant for the claim. Besides, most American children would rather have movie stars as parents but does that mean only movie stars can have children? Evidence Deconstruction: Types