On Toulin

Toulin's system of data, warrants, claims, etc. makes sense, and really doesn't seem that foreign, considering it truly is suggesting a logistical system, and one of the things we will want to teach our students to do is avoid logical fallacies. It doesn't seem to me that Toulin brings anything radical to the table, but it does seem that he takes Aristotelian argument and breaks it down into more complex parts. I think it would be work going over with students, perhaps in conjunction with a discussion of logical fallacies. It may even be a good thing to bring to their attention when discussing the nature of argument in general. The question seems to be whether they would get this anway, without having to be shown Toulin's model. In some ways, the model is common sense--"if this true, then this can be presumed to be true, unless this other thing is happening"--and it seems that any good argument is going to either work or fall apart based upon how well it holds together logically. I'm not sure a student needs to see Toulin's model to be able to recognize when an argument doesn't hold together logically, but it probably would hurt. I think another question is how cookie-cutter do we want the papers to be. If we break down the components too much, then a paper becomes a math problem or a science experiment (which, admittedly a good paper has characteristics of both) but good writing also has an organic quality which goes beyond A+B=C.