Claims specify what is going to be argued. When readers review a claim, they should understand the topic and scope of the argument.
Strong claims are clear, focused, and debatable.
"Humans need things to survive" is a weak claim because it lacks all three characteristics. It is not clear, because it does not specify what things a human needs to live. It is also not focused, since it attempts to address all needs that every person has - such a topic is far too broad for a single paper or debate. Finally, this claim is not debatable; it is merely a fact. No one would make an attempt to argue that humans do not need certain things to survive.
"Humans need shelter, water, and food to survive" is a slightly better claim because it is addresses specific human survival needs. However, this claim is still weak because it not focused (the type of shelter needed will depend on the time period and geographic region at hand) and not debatable (no one would debate that humans do not need shelter, water, and food to survive.)
"Modern Americans need housing, clean water, and healthy food to thrive" is better still because it is clear and focused (the claim now only addresses modern-day humans living in the United States). Yet this claim is still weak because it is not debatable.
"Congress ought to allocate $10 million to housing, clean water, and healthy food for Americans" is a strong claim, because it is clear, focused, and debatable. Whether or not Congress should allocate resources for these needs would provide adequate controversy for a paper or debate.
 |
To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member.
Create your account
While all strong claims will share certain characteristics, there are many different types of claims that fit different writing contexts. Read on for some strong statement examples.
Factual Claim
A factual claim will reframe and rely upon a fact to shape it into a debatable topic.
For instance, "The driver in question was speeding and hit and killed Mrs. Smith" is a factual sentence, but it does not make any specific arguments.
The claim "The driver in question hit and killed Mrs. Smith because he was driving over the speed limit" is a factual claim, since it reframes the two facts to craft them into a debatable argument - that the driver hit and killed Mrs. Smith because he was driving over the speed limit.
Cause and Effect Claims
A cause and effect claim argues that an event occurred as the direct result of a specific catalyst. For instance, "Mary Shelley included human rights themes in her novel Frankenstein as a result of written influence from her mother, Mary Wollstonecraft, who wrote Vindication of the Rights of Woman" is a cause and effect claim because it argues that the result (Mary Shelley's themes in Frankenstein) are a result of her mother's influence (Mary Wollstonecraft's writing in Vindication of the Rights of Woman).
Value Claims
A value claim will frame a moral or philosophical issue in a debatable format. For instance, "Individuals have a moral responsibility to lie if it saves a human life." The issue of which moral principle - saving human lives or honesty - is more important is a moral debate established by the claim's wording.
Solution Claims
A solution claim posits that specific actions must be taken (usually in the form of government intervention) to solve a problem. For instance, "The state of Arkansas should spend $4 million on school lunches for elementary-aged children to ensure success in school" is a solution claim because it seeks to address a specific problem with a specific solution.
Counterclaims
A counterclaim is a powerful type of claim that can be built into any argumentative paper. To strengthen an argument, a writer might try to foresee an opposing claim that could theoretically weaken the writer's stance. The writer can offer a rebuttal, or response, to show audiences that the writer or speaker at hand understands the complexities of the topic they are discussing and still believes that their claim is correct.
A counterclaim will usually include an acknowledgement of the potential argument and a rebuttal. For instance, if a writer arguing that Republics are stronger than Democracies because they allow for public input while also protecting minority groups from majority oppression, they might write, "While some might argue that a republic distances the public from political power, allowing for representatives in government only concentrates the people's ability to effect change in a community."
To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member.
Create your account
Based on the descriptions above, what is the strength level of the following claim?
"Natural disasters can cause catastrophic damage."
Answer: This is a weak factual claim. It is rooted in the reality of natural disasters and their impacts, but the statement is still weak because it is unclear (the modal verb "can" makes the statement somewhat confusing: Is the argument only that natural disasters have the potential to cause damage or that they always cause damage?) unfocused (which type of natural disaster will be discussed?), and not debatable (who could argue that all natural disasters cause damage all the time?).
In order for this claim to be strong, it would need to be rewritten in a clearer, more focused, and debatable way, such as:
"Earthquake preparedness ought to be a priority in local government, especially in underdeveloped communities."
Here is another example. Attempt to guess the strength level of the following claim:
"Martha is a good applicant for the account manager position."
Answer: This is a weak solution claim. It offers a clear and focused solution to a problem - Martha is a person who could hold the unfilled position. But the claim is still undebatable, since there could be many good applicants for the position. The argument would be stronger if it were rewritten as follows:
"Martha is the strongest applicant for the account manager position."
For a final example, guess the strength level of the following claim:
"The RMS Titanic's shortage of lifeboats resulted in 1,517 preventable deaths."
Answer: This is a strong cause and effect claim. It is clear (the Titanic, the lifeboats, the death count are all communicated), focused (the claim is only addressing the RMS Titanic, not all shipwrecks), and debatable (even if everyone had had access to lifeboats, were all 1,517 deaths truly preventable with the damage to the ship and early 20th-century communication systems?).
To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member.
Create your account
A claim is only one of three elements in a strong argument. With a clear, focused, and debatable claim, writers can still craft weak arguments if they lack reasons and evidence.
Paul Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement describes the varying levels and efficacy of argument types. Arguments that attack opponents but offer no reasons or evidence are lower on the hierarchy. Ad hominem, or personal attacks, land at the bottom of the pyramid since their claims are often irrelevant and lack both reason and evidence.
Claims halfway up the hierarchy will address the argument and offer some evidence but will not address an opponent's core reasoning.
Claims at the top of the hierarchy address the core issue at hand by refuting reasons and offering reliable evidence.
 |
Strong vs. Weak Reasoning
Effective reasons will be relevant, or directly support a claim, and follow a logical process. A great way for writers to produce reasons is to ask themselves why they believe a claim is true.
Relevance is key in strong reasons. For instance, if a writer were to make a claim about String Theory, bringing up modern unitarian governments would be irrelevant and unhelpful.
Similarly, reasoning must be logical. If a writer were to craft an argument about whether George should receive a raise, arguments about his work ethic and dependability would be logical avenues, instead of arguing about the spiffiness of his hats or the likability of his cats. Even if those reasons are true, they have no logical application to the issue at hand.
Good reasons are included in the following example. If Janice is applying for a scholarship, she could craft a strong argument by describing her grade point average, her extracurricular activities, and her involvement in her community. All three reasons are relevant, logical, and answer the question as to why she should earn a scholarship.
Strong vs. Weak Evidence
Strong evidence is relevant, convincing, and credible.
Evidence must be rooted in verifiable fact - sources matter! An opinion from an unverified source is not equal to a peer-reviewed source from a reliable website.
For instance, if a writer were arguing about the history of women's rights in the United States, a peer-reviewed journal on an academic website would be a much more reliable source than commentary from an unknown author on an opinion blog.
To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member.
Create your account
Argumentative writing requires strong claims, or statements that are clear, focused, and debatable. Different types of claims (factual, cause and effect, solution, etc.) can be used based on the topic and audience, but all claims require logical reasons and reliable evidence in order to contribute to a strong argument. Strong arguments will also involve rebuttals, or responses to potential counterclaims. Good writing will also be selective with relevant, logical reasons and verifiable evidence.
To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member.
Create your account
Video Transcript
The Elements of an Argument
Arguments are everywhere. Someone is always trying to convince us of something. Part of our job as readers is to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of these arguments and figure out whether or not we should adopt the perspectives they present. This lesson will offer some tips about how to do just that.
Before we begin, though, let's review the basic elements of an argument. An argument, as we know, is a form of communication that tries to persuade its audience to adopt a particular position about a topic. Arguments have three main parts: a claim that states the position to be argued; reasons that logically explain why the claim should be accepted; and evidence that supports the reasons with facts, anecdotes, statistics, expert testimony, and examples. The statements a writer makes to offer a claim, reasons, and evidence can weaken or strengthen an argument. Let's see how this works.
Strong Claims vs. Weak Claims
To be strong and effective, a claim should be debatable, focused, and specific. In other words, it ought to be something that can be argued with reasons and evidence, and it ought to be narrow enough to properly support or prove in the space and format available.
Take a look at the following claim and determine whether it is strong or weak: The environment must be protected. This is a weak claim because it is not debatable. Everyone would agree that the environment must be protected, so there really isn't an argument here. Starting with a non-debatable claim weakens the argument from the get-go. A stronger claim might be something like this: Congress ought to allocate 25% of its annual budget to programs that will either preserve the environment or work to clean up environmental disasters. Now there's an argument that has some controversy in it!
Let's try one more example. In this case, the writer is preparing an argumentative essay. Is the following claim strong or weak? Slavery was the ultimate cause of the Civil War. Did you say weak? If so, you're right. This claim isn't focused and specific enough for the scope of an essay. Historians have been debating this in books of hundreds of pages for many years. The writer has bitten off more than he can chew. A stronger claim might look something like this: The men of the Second Minnesota Volunteer Infantry signed up for service out of patriotism rather than out of any desire to eliminate slavery. See how this claim is narrower and more focused? It could be easily debated within the confines of an essay.
Strong Reasons vs. Weak Reasons
Strong arguments have logical and clear reasons that directly support the claim. They answer the question, Why is this claim true?
Let's say a writer makes the claim that John Jones is the best candidate for the district's Senate seat. He offers the following reasons to support the claim. See if you can pick out which reasons are strong and which are weak.
- John Jones is a terrific baseball player.
- John Jones has many years of experience in politics.
- John Jones is a nice guy.
- John Jones is committed to improving his community and working for his constituents.
If you said that number two and number four were strong reasons, you are correct. They are logical; readers and voters will want to know about John Jones' political experience and dedication to his community and constituents. They are clear; readers understand the reasons with no questions left in their minds. They directly support the claim and answer the question of why John Jones is the best candidate.
How about reasons number one and number three? Both of these are weak. They do not logically, clearly, or directly support the claim of the argument. Who cares if John Jones is a terrific baseball player? What does that have to do with his race for Senate? How do baseball skills translate to being a good candidate for political office? What's more, John Jones may be a perfectly nice guy and a very poor senator.
Strong Evidence vs. Weak Evidence
A strong claim and strong reasons require strong evidence. Strong evidence is accurate, convincing, and relevant to the argument at hand. It comes from a credible source, and it truly supports the reason it is supposed to prove.
Let's look at some examples of strong and weak evidence. We'll continue to explore the claim that John Jones is the best candidate for the district's Senate seat. Recall that we have two strong reasons to support that claim:
- John Jones has many years of experience in politics.
- John Jones is committed to improving his community and working for his constituents.
For reason number one, the writer provides two pieces of evidence. See if you can determine which one is strong and which one is weak. First, the writer lists the political offices Mr. Jones has held, explaining the duties he performed in these positions, and tallies the total number of years Mr. Jones has worked in the political arena. Second, the writer provides an anecdote about how Mr. Jones represented the city council at a baseball game and threw out the first pitch.
If you said the first piece of evidence was strong and the second was weak, you are correct. The first piece of evidence, provided that it is accurate, is relevant to the argument, supports the reason, and is quite convincing. The second is not relevant to the argument, and it does not support the reason.
For reason number two, the writer also provides two pieces of evidence. Again, figure out which one is strong and which one is weak. First, the writer provides a set of statistics about Mr. Jones' donations to local charities and causes, as well as his numerous volunteer hours. Second, the writer offers a quote from Mr. Jones' neighbor, Joe, who says, Sure, old John loves living here. We talk about this community all the time. The first piece of evidence is strong because it provides relevant information to prove the reason's truth, but the second piece of evidence is vague, and it doesn't come from a credible source. Neighbor Joe doesn't seem to know much at all about Mr. Jones' community involvement.
Lesson Summary
Let's review. An argument is a form of communication that tries to persuade its audience to adopt a particular position about a topic. Arguments have three main parts: a claim that states the position to be argued; reasons that logically explain why the claim should be accepted; and evidence that supports the reasons with facts, anecdotes, statistics, expert testimony, and examples. The statements a writer makes to offer a claim, reasons, and evidence can weaken or strengthen an argument.
Strong claims are debatable, focused, and specific. Strong reasons are logical and clear, and they directly support the claim, answering the question Why is this claim true? Strong evidence is accurate, convincing, and relevant to the argument at hand. It comes from a credible source, and it truly supports the reason it is supposed to prove.
Evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of arguments is an important skill to develop. If you can do this, you will be much better able to think critically about what you read and decide for yourself whether or not the arguments that confront you every day are truly convincing.
Learning Outcomes
Utilize the knowledge that you gain from this lesson to:
- Name the three elements of a writing argument
- Analyze the differences between strong and weak reasons
- Cite examples of strong and weak evidence and claims
To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member.
Create your account
