Week 13 — Readings & Resources

Your primary reading is Chapter 13 (in this module). Everything below is the optional, go-deeper layer — pick what helps, skip the rest.

How to use this page

This page has 10 items (4 readings and 6 videos). Allow 65–78 minutes for everything. Each group points back to the matching chapter section and class-session segment, so use the full menu when you want more, or take the quick path below.

Every video here has captions: turn them on with the CC button in the player. The chapter covers the same ideas in text.

Pick-one quick path (17–20 min total)

• Argumentation — Studypedia
• Intro to Fallacies — Patricia Jenkinson
• The Ad Hominem Fallacy — PBS Idea Channel

① Getting from evidence to a conclusion

Chapter 13, Section “Four types of reasoning: find the path from evidence to claim” · Session 1, Segment 1, “Four types of reasoning” · Remember: inductive reasoning starts from cases, deductive reasoning starts from a principle, and coming first is never proof of causing.

• Deductive vs Inductive Reasoning - Valid & Sound vs Strong & Cogent — Thinking About Stuff — a short animated lesson on what an argument is and how deductive and inductive arguments differ; it adds four extra evaluation words, so use it mainly to check which way each kind of argument travels. (video, 6 min) (captions: automatic)
• Correlation Doesn't Equal Causation: Crash Course Statistics #8 — CrashCourse — a statistics episode built around the rule that two things moving together do not show that one causes the other; this builds on Week 10's work matching the right graph to the data, since the video uses scatter plots to show two things changing together, and you can skip the formulas. (video, 12 min) (captions: creator)
• The Post Hoc Fallacy — Critical Thinking Web — a short tutorial on mistaking a correlation for a cause, with an example of a hidden common cause behind two trends; try its common-cause question on the chapter's café manager. (reading, 5–8 min)

② Mapping an argument

Chapter 13, Section “Map the argument: claim, evidence, and warrant” · Session 1, Segment 2, “Toulmin's map of an argument” · Remember: the evidence is what you cite, and the warrant is the usually unstated principle that makes it count.

• Toulmin Model of Argument — Leslie C. Johnson — a lecture-style walkthrough of the parts of Toulmin's model; it calls the evidence grounds and says every argument always has all six parts, while this course treats the model as a simplification and its map of the running speech uses five, and its account of how Toulmin built the model is the presenter's own, so match each part it names to the course's claim, evidence, and warrant, and use it while you complete the Week-13 module overview. (video, 9 min) (captions: creator)
• Argumentation — Studypedia — a study guide's page on building an academic argument with Toulmin's model, naming the claim, grounds, and warrant and the three optional parts; it is written for papers, so picture each part said aloud in your persuasive speech. (reading, 6–9 min)

③ Spotting the flaws

Chapter 13, Section “Fallacies that dodge or rig the argument” · Session 2, Segment 3, “The fallacies” · Remember: ad hominem attacks the person, a straw man bends the position, and a red herring changes the subject.

• Intro to Fallacies — Patricia Jenkinson — an introduction to what a fallacy is, how a valid argument differs from a sound one, and the ways fallacies are classified, by reasoning type and by form; it names only a few fallacies, in passing near the end, so use it for the big picture and for its point that naming a fallacy is not enough until you can explain why the argument fails. (video, 9 min) (captions: creator)
• The Ad Hominem Fallacy — PBS Idea Channel — a two-minute explainer on attacking the person instead of the argument and how to avoid it; notice when an insult becomes a reason offered to reject the argument. (video, 2 min) (captions: creator)
• The Strawman Fallacy — PBS Idea Channel — a two-minute explainer on arguing against a distorted version of someone's position; compare it with the red herring reading below, which leaves the topic instead of bending it. (video, 2 min) (captions: creator)
• Red Herring: Using Irrelevant Information as a Distraction — Effectiviology — an article with everyday workplace and interview examples of changing the subject, plus a list of ways to answer one; read the examples and the response list, and skip the history of the phrase. (reading, 8–12 min)

Optional one-stop reference (free online reference)

• Deductive and Inductive Arguments, Introduction — Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy — a free reference encyclopedia's entry; read only the Introduction, with its two short syllogism-style examples, and stop there, since next week turns from argument to special-occasion speaking and working in small groups. (reading, 6–9 min)

Heads-up (links rot): these point to outside sites that occasionally move or rename pages. If a link ever fails, tell your instructor and use the reference above in the meantime.

Provenance: Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com