Question

Reflect on the act of argumentation and its uses in different contexts, according to the 'types of knowledge' you gained by developing this assignment. In a larger sense, why is it important to understand classical argumentation? How might you call upon argumentative strategies in a university? In the workplace? In other situations in life?

Answer 1

The Argument Toolkit

Developing and setting out argument is an “intellectual exercise” and really there are no hard and fast rules. Nevertheless, in general, setting out an argument requires methods to:

• collect all the evidence and facts related to an issue,
• substantiate those facts, and
• set out your position relying on both the facts and the evidence.

What’s needed are “power tools” — but without imposing a rigid “technology based solution” that would shackle creativity and our thought processes.

In MasterFile:

• Doc-links let you reference key evidence; simply insert doc-links to existing argument when you uncover evidence during document review or when you’re drafting argument right where you need to substantiate a point.
• Views let you instantly pinpoint specific documents or extracts of key evidence; and since you navigate MasterFile’s views while creating doc-links, locating and creating a doc-link to substantiate anything is one operation.
• Unique text fields allow you to not only draft and format passages of your argument, just as you would in Word, but more importantly, allow you to insert doc-links, point by point, to the supporting or corroborating evidence where you need.

We call these collective capabilities the ‘Argument Toolkit’.

Using the toolkit — there is no right way

Doc-links and facts work hand-in-hand to form the core of MasterFile’s argument “power tools”.
However, there are no hard and fast rules! So here are some of the ways we’ve found to be best that should help you get started:

• If the case is relatively simple, create fact profiles for critical issues and then set out your entire case in an Argument profile, which we’ll get to in a moment, substantiating all your points directly with relevant evidence — you’ll find even for a small matter it’s faster than working in Word and entering citations manually!
• If a particular issue has a lot of evidence behind it, collect it for review first, before deciding on a position and associated argument. You’ll find it best to create an issue keyword, perhaps with some sub-topics, and tag the documents and relevant extracts as you uncover them during your document review. Then create an Argument profile for that issue and set out your position, linking in the evidence as needed.
  
• If you already know your position vis-a-vis an issue or there are few items of evidence relevant to it, then you’ll find it best to first create an Argument profile for it, and rather than tagging the evidence with an issue keyword, simply use the “Insert doc-link” button to link-in the relevant supporting evidence or other facts you need.
• Often, you uncover new evidence or information to link. Use the “Add to Existing Fact/Argument” button within any profile to add it — with any necessary comments.

Alternatively, you can take a different tack …

• It’s sometimes faster to first create Argument profiles for all major issues and doc-link other substantiating facts and evidence to the issue and then go back and draft your argument for each, now that supporting evidence has been linked-in. You can do this in two ways
  • Use “Add to Existing Fact/Argument” during document review, or
  • call up the document and fact selector from within your Argument profile, select the relevant profiles and click “Insert”
• Some issues are best explained as a “dissertation” rather than split up in dozens of separate fact profiles. In this case, we make one Argument profile and set out our entire position or thesis there. If there are some key facts you do want to keep separate and not part of the overall explanation, leave them in their own fact profiles with their own supporting evidence and your notes, and doc-link that fact in the “dissertation” where you need it.
• If the nature of the facts in your case are such that several will end up substantiating many others, set those out in their own fact profiles and doc-link to reference as needed and avoid duplication.
• In a lengthy or complex chronology, it’s usually worthwhile to set out all the important individual events in their own fact profiles. Then create a few fact profiles bringing together eras of the chronology — much like a section of a history covers a particular era. Rather than the chronology being just a list of events in a database view, the events of each era become a coherent story, with relevant thoughts, notes etc. If you’re using CaseSoft’s TimeMap® to graph the timelines, create one TimeMap graphic per era with as many TimeMap event boxes as needed for the related fact profile in MasterFile with the details and evidence relating to that event in that era.
• Since MasterFile lets you to create doc-links to documents, extracts and facts in other MasterFile databases, authorities and precedents may be best kept in their own MasterFile database for easy reference. Our post Innovative uses of MasterFile beyond the obvious covers this in more detail.

The Argument document type

In general, the argument within fact profiles will be related to substantiating your position with respect to a fact or refuting the opposing side with respect to that fact, and this may require you to rely on other facts, as shown in the diagram above. However, at some point, all the facts need to be woven into a coherent picture that tells your story, like a closing argument. The special Argument document type (keyword “Miscellaneous/Argument”) is where you set that out:

• Create a new document of the type Miscellaneous/Argument. This profile will have no attachment. And complete the required information section as usual, with a description/summary of either “Case Argument” or if you are telling the story around an issue, the appropriate description for that issue — and in that case, link the Argument profile to that issue

CLASSICAL ARGUMENTATION

One of the oldest organizing devices in rhetoric is the classical argument, which incorporates the five parts of a discourse that ancient teachers of rhetoric believed were necessary for persuasion, especially when the audience included a mixture of reactions from favorable to hostile. They often prescribed this order to students, not because it was absolutely ideal, but because using the scheme encouraged the writer to take account of some of the most important elements of composing:

• beginning in an interesting way

• providing background or context that was relevant to their specific audience

• stating their claims and evidence clearly and emphatically

• taking account of opposing viewpoints and anticipating objections

• and concluding in a satisfying and effective way.

The classical argument isn’t a cookie-cutter template: simply filling in the parts does not by itself make you successful. But if you use the structure as a way to make sure you cover all the needs of all parts of your audience, you will find it a very useful heuristic for developing effective arguments.

ARGUMENTS AT WORK PLACE

Developing effective conflict resolution skill sets are an essential component of a building a sustainable business model. Unresolved conflict often results in loss of productivity, the stifling of creativity, and the creation of barriers to cooperation and collaboration. Perhaps most importantly for leaders, good conflict resolution ability equals good employee retention. Leaders who don’t deal with conflict will eventually watch their good talent walk out the door in search of a healthier and safer work environment.

While conflict is a normal part of any social and organizational setting, the challenge of conflict lies in how one chooses to deal with it. Concealed, avoided or otherwise ignored, conflict will likely fester only to grow into resentment, create withdrawal or cause factional infighting within an organization.

So, what creates conflict in the workplace? Opposing positions, competitive tensions, power struggles, ego, pride, jealousy, performance discrepancies, compensation issues, just someone having a bad day, etc. While the answer to the previous question would appear to lead to the conclusion that just about anything and everything creates conflict, the reality is that the root of most conflict is either born out of poor communication or the inability to control one’s emotions. Let’s examine these 2 major causes of conflict:

Communication: If you reflect back upon conflicts you have encountered over the years, you’ll quickly recognize many of them resulted from a lack of information, poor information, no information, or misinformation. Let’s assume for a moment that you were lucky enough to have received good information, but didn’t know what to do with it…That is still a communication problem, which in turn can lead to conflict. Clear, concise, accurate, and timely communication of information will help to ease both the number and severity of conflicts.

Emotions: Another common mistake made in workplace communications which leads to conflict is letting emotions drive decisions. I have witnessed otherwise savvy executives place the need for emotional superiority ahead of achieving their mission (not that they always understood this at the time). Case in point - have you ever witnessed an employee throw a fit of rage and draw the regrettable line in the sand in the heat of the moment? If you have, what you really watched was a person indulging their emotions rather than protecting their future.