Instructors Manual With Test

Instructor’s Manual With Test Bank For Arguing, Reasoning, and Thinking Well by Robert Gass John Seiter Steph Bee Test Bank Correct Answer is ma rked with * 1 / 4

Chapter 1: Why Study Argument?

Key Terms and Concepts arguing as a developmental process fairness principle theory of mind appeal to the crowd faux reasoning verbal aggression; verbal aggressiveness arguing effectively arguing appropriately advocacy function defensive function hasty generalization epistemic advocacy function defensive function decision- making function knowledge function dialectical method Socratic method risking the self social competence function citizen participation function sensitivity function “fun” function/intellectual challenge function common ground shared goals; common values “we” statements identification empathy respect tolerance partial agreement respectful disagreement questioning versus declaring perception checking paraphrasing prosocial nature of argument common- sense view of argument enlightened view of argument

Chapter Summary Arguing is a developmental process.Arguing is more than a back-and-forth process of saying “yes” or “no.” Children are not cognitively developed enough to engage in real argument.Arguing skills coincide with cognitive development and language development.Children must also learn social norms for arguing. 2 / 4

Arguing is cultural and contextual.Cultural norms govern arguing practices, including when, where, how, and with whom to argue.In general, Western cultures value direct, assertive argument more than Asian cultures.Many adults lack effective arguing and reasoning skills.Faux arguments may resemble real arguments, but they lack substance.Verbal aggressiveness represents a skill deficiency.Arguers who lack argumentation skills often resort to insults, threats, and ultimatums.Verbal aggressiveness is a form of hostility, not assertiveness.Arguing skills can be improved.People aren’t born good arguers or bad arguers.Communication competence requires the ability to argue effectively and argue appropriately.Critical- thinking skills can improve with practice.

Advocacy function: Studying argumentation can improve advocacy skills.

Defensive function: Learning about argumentation can aid in resisting fallacious or unethical arguments.

Decision-making function: The ability to argue, reason, and think well improves

problem-solving and decision- making.The knowledge function: Arguing is epistemic; through the process of arguing, people discover what they know and believe..The dialectical method, or Socratic method, which relies on questioning, is a way of testing competing arguments.Arguing risks the self, because we are ego-involved in arguments. When we choose to argue, we risk having our attitudes and beliefs challenged.

The social competence function: Improving arguing skills assists with conflict

management.The citizen participation function: Democracy depends upon an informed citizenry.Participation in elections and other forms of civic engagement require arguing, reasoning, and thinking skills. 3 / 4

The sensitivity function: Arguing cultivates open-mindedness and the ability to see things from others’ point of view.The “fun” function: Arguing can be enjoyed as an intellectual challenge and a verbal game that people play.Establishing rapport is beneficial before beginning an argument.Seek to establish common ground in the form of shared goals and values.Use “we” statements to lessen the adversarial nature of the interaction.Try to identify and connect with the other person by showing empathy.Demonstrate respect and tolerance for the other person’s point of view.When transitioning into an argument, use strategies to minimize defensiveness.Manage the interaction by using partial agreement, rather than complete disagreement.Respectfully disagree by being assertive, yet polite and courteous.Phrase your initial objection as a question, rather than a declaration.Use perception- checking to make sure you understand the other person’s position.Use paraphrasing to demonstrate that you are being fair-minded and understand the other person.

Teaching Activities

Exercise 1.1 Ice Breaker for Introducing Everyday Arguments

Goal or purpose: First, to get students talking and participating early on. Second, to demonstrate that arguments are common in everyday life and take place in a variety of contexts.

Time required: 10-15 minutes

Procedures: Ask if anyone in class recalls a recent argument they had with one or more persons. That includes arguments with a family member, significant other, boss, co-worker, fellow student, or even a stranger. Hint 1: If a student asks, “What counts as an argument?” answer, “Any verbal disagreement with another person.” Hint 2: If no one volunteers, you may want to share an example of your own.Once a student volunteers, ask the following questions:

• / 4