The Toulmin Method and Online Communication

 

Image by Chen from Pixabay

 

This week’s discussion revolves around the Toulmin Method of analyzing and forming persuasive arguments in regard to online communication. 

Since the internet plays a substantial role in how we communicate and learn new information, it can be helpful to have a way to evaluate that information and the arguments that we encounter online. The Toulmin Method can be utilized as a guide or a template with which to assess blog posts, Facebook posts, forums, news or other articles, and more. The Toulmin Method can also be used to gauge how well these online arguments are supported by evidence. Additionally, this method can help us respond convincingly and professionally to someone else's argument with a creditable argument of our own, using the Toulmin Method.

So, what is the Toulmin Method? 

The main structures of the Toulmin Method are claim, data, warrant, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal. A claim is defined as the author’s or arguer’s opinion about the topic—the assertion of which they want to convince their audience. Next, is the data—that is, the grounds or evidence on which they base their claim—such as scientific studies, statistics, quotes, reports, etc. The warrant is the unspoken beliefs or values that the author/arguer assumes their readership shares. The next component needed is backing or evidential support for the warrant. A qualifier is a statement that indicates how absolute the arguer's position is on a proposition; it limits or narrows their stance as being true only under certain conditions. Finally, a rebuttal is the opportunity for the arguer to address the likely counter arguments that their claim will incur.  

Source

 

For example, the Toulmin Model can be used when watching political debates or reading news articles. When a person makes a claim about a topic or an opponent, we can ascertain how well supported that claim is based on their data (evidence). We can more easily identify where they are coming from by understanding their warrant, or the unstated values, behind their arguments and determine how sound they are by its backing. We can listen for qualifiers to tell us how serious they are about a claim or what will limit their claim as well as how prepared they are in their rebuttals. 

As with anything, however, there are also limitations to applying the Toulmin Method in online communication—for instance, information overload. Sometimes, it can be “too much” to respond analytically to someone who is venting, say, about political party decisions or policies. In this instance, I doubt the author would be in the mental position to read over a carefully Toulmin-crafted argument about why they should reconsider their opinion on the matter. In that vein, there is also emotional influence to consider. It can be difficult to apply or receive an academic-like argument in the midst of flaring tempers. 

The best way to navigate these challenges—and thus, engage in more thoughtful and constructive online conversations—would be to aware yourself and your intended audience. Are they in a position to be a willing participant, or will it just be too much unnecessary information? Is this the appropriate time, site, or person for this argument? Am I responding in anger, in a way that is purposefully divisive, or am I arguing with the honest intention to offer an alternate point of view? Being selective where, and when, and with whom you argue as well as how you argue will likely produce better results for both you and the other party. 

In this digital age, utilizing the Toulmin method effectively can be beneficial. Consider how false information is rampant and information literacy—or knowing how to evaluate all the opinions we read on social media, online platforms, news channels, etc.—is not widespread. If we use the Toulmin Method as a guide in these situations, we can likely establish the credibility of those we follow and of the items we read online. Lastly, if we use the Toulmin Method in our own arguments, we can become more confident in expressing our point of view.