Name / Group Members: Professor: Javier Andreas Maria Posadas

Bolivar, Krisna Jaira R. Date: February 19, 2024

Cuevas, Andrea
Derilo, Allyah
Duatin, Lincoln
Geroche, Trixie Anne Maxine
Section and Subject: GED0120-LEC-Sec243-MN

Points for Analyzation and Reflection / Question Guide

Main Questions Synthesis Guide Score Segmentation Total
Exam
Score
1. Mind Mapping –  Using the class  Organization of
Argumentation brainstorming and Ideas [ ]
Collective mind-mapping
Description activities, defend the  Topic Knowledge
definition/s and Mastery [ ]
(20 points) synthesized by the
class  Introduction of
Thesis and Stance
o Link the class [ ]
definition/s
with  Analysis,
professional Interpretation and
and scholarly Counterargument
definitions s
[ ]
o What are the
benefits of
learning
argumentation
as a student?
2. Three Spheres of  What utility or  Organization of
Argumentation importance is there to Ideas [ ]
learning about the
(20 points) Spheres of Argument?  Topic Knowledge
and Mastery [ ]
o What are the
Three Spheres  Introduction of
 of Influence Thesis and Stance
and their [ ]
Differences?
 Analysis,
o Give examples Interpretation and
of each sphere Counterargument
for clarification s
[ ]
o How are each
argumentative
spheres
approached in
conversation /
debate /
negotiation?

Link your
analysis to
your already
given examples
3. Essence of  What are the uses and  Organization of
Debate benefits in learning Ideas [ ]
how to debate in
(20 Points) formal and informal  Topic Knowledge
platforms? and Mastery [ ]

o What are the  Introduction of

differences Thesis and Stance
between [ ]
Formal and
Informal  Analysis,
Debates? Interpretation and
Counterargument
o Reflect and s
defend the [ ]
utility of
learning the
terminologies
in
argumentation

o Appraise the
Philosophy of
Stoicism for
Argumentation
and Debates
 Formative Assessment 1 Rubrics for Grading
Room for Adequate Mastery Excellent Execution
Improvement 2-3 Points 4-5 Points
0-1 Points
1. Organization of Ideas Presents ideas in a Presents ideas in a well- Presents ideas in a logical
(5pts) disorganized manner with organized manner with a and coherent manner with
a lack of clear structure, clear structure, and a clear and effective
and transitions between transitions between ideas organizational structure,
ideas are weak or absent. are smooth. and transitions between
ideas are seamless.

2. Topic Knowledge and The student demonstrates The student exhibits a The student displays a
Mastery (5pts) a lack of understanding of partial understanding of clear and comprehensive
the subject matter, as the information, and while understanding of the
evidenced by an inability supporting material is information. Citations are
to answer questions about present, it may lack consistently introduced
the topic. There is a originality. Citations are and attributed
notable absence of proper generally introduced and appropriately, reflecting
citations, and when attributed appropriately, accuracy and adherence to
citations are provided, showing an understanding proper referencing. The
they are attributed of proper referencing. The supporting material
incorrectly. The supporting student is comfortable presented is not only
material employed may be providing expected original but also logical and
inaccurate, generalized, or answers to questions but relevant to the subject
inappropriate for the may fall short in matter. The student goes
context. Additionally, elaborating on the beyond the basic
there is a noticeable over- responses. Additionally, requirements by providing
dependence on notes there is an observable thorough answers to all
during the presentation. overdependence on notes class questions, offering
during the presentation. detailed explanations and
elaborations.

3. Introduction of Thesis Presents a vague or weak Presents a clear thesis Presents a clear and
and Stance thesis statement with statement supported by compelling thesis
limited supporting well-developed arguments, statement supported by
arguments, demonstrating showing a solid well-developed arguments,
a lack of understanding of understanding of the topic. demonstrating a deep
the topic. understanding of the topic.

4. Analysis, Provides a limited or Provides a solid analysis of Provides insightful and

Interpretation and unclear analysis of evidence, showing a good thorough analysis of
Counterarguments evidence, making weak understanding of its evidence, showing a deep
connections between significance and drawing understanding of its
evidence and thesis. Fails clear connections between significance and drawing
to address potential evidence and thesis. sophisticated connections
counterarguments between evidence and
adequately, Addresses potential thesis.
demonstrating a limited counterarguments,
awareness of opposing providing a well-balanced Anticipates and addresses
viewpoints. consideration of different potential
perspectives and counterarguments
demonstrating an effectively, strengthening
awareness of opposing the overall argument and
viewpoints. demonstrating a nuanced
 understanding of opposing
viewpoints.

Begin to formulate your answers on the next blank page – good luck and be brave!

Abstract

This paper showcases the analysis and reflection of the group on argumentation, providing its

benefits on scholars or students. This paper also focuses on analysis and reflection about debate

that were consolidated as a group.

1. Introduction

In the contemporary world, social, political, and scientific controversies are prevalent, especially

in the Philippines. Resolving these issues requires having different skills of argument. To shape

these skills, one must consistently practice argumentation by emphasizing the essential

components associated with it as identified by the group. Argumentation refers to the act or

process of forming reasons and drawing conclusions and applying them to a case in discussion

(Merriam-Webster, n.d.). Studying argumentation provides different skills or lessons for students

in which they can use in different eras of their lives. Bolivar, et al. (2024) has provided essential

components that formulate or are associated with argumentation which are logic, persuasion,

critical thinking, and debate.

 Figure 1 – Argumentation Mind Map (Bolivar, et al., 2024)

1.1. Logic

Logic seeks to know between sound and unsound reasoning, distinguishing good reasoning from

bad reasoning (The basics of philosophy, n,d.) In argumentation, logic serves as the foundation

of your well-founded and solid point without any false premises or assumptions. When using

logic, you may come across using different approaches such as deductive reasoning whereas it

involves drawing specific conclusions to general premises. An argument can be assessed using

deductive reasoning through its validity and soundness (Bhandari, 2023). Inductive reasoning

formulates from generalizations to specific instances and Bhandari (2023) mentioned that it is

used informally in everyday situations. Lastly, abductive reasoning highlights the best

explanation in arguments (Merriam-Webster, n.d.). Evidently, with the use of logic employing

deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning, the arguments of the scholars ensures a well-

founded point that leads to the understanding the validity, soundness, and structure of every

argument.
 1.2. Persuasion

According to Crash Course (2016), people can be persuaded by arguments. So, the group

decided to include persuasion as an important component in argumentation due to the fact that it

incorporates different appeals that can help people with argumentation at the same time, and can

be interpreted differently which may create arguments that are not reliable. First, having

emotional appeals to relate with the audience. It is also used in a way of having good diction,

visuals, and idealism that could be an advantage for your argument but when it is not done

properly, it may come off as manipulation and produce stereotypical statements (University

Writing Center, 2015). Second, logical appeals are for your argument to have a structure and be

valid. It contains clear claims, strong evidence, and open for opposition; however, it is also prone

to over-generalized claims, fallacies, and ignoring opposing views (University Writing Center,

2015). At last, ethical appeals to establish trust, confidence, and support for the presented

argument. This also establishes being sincere and honest although it may advocate intolerant

ideas or become biased (University Writing Center, 2015). These appeals of arguments are

deeply connected in argumentation as it distinguishes whether you are using it correctly or

incorrectly that could affect one’s argument.

1.3. Critical Thinking

Honing your skills in critical thinking also plays a crucial role in argumentation as it helps you

provide evidence to back up your claim and make your argument stronger and it helps you

strategize to have an effective argumentation and counterarguments. Critical thinking refers to

thinking clearly and carefully and Book Down (n.d.) discussed that, “to become a critical thinker

is to become a certain kind of person, a person of intellectual virtue”. This involves having an
open mind, attentiveness, and fairness when an individual is in an argumentation. As students, it

is only required to have evidence to support your claims to assess the quality, relevance, and

reliability of the argument. Through critical thinking, it also promotes having strategies when it

comes to presenting your claims and it also prepares you to anticipate counterarguments. As well

as strengthening your position in an argumentation.

1.4. Debate

Argumentation is associated with debate may it be in formal that adheres to specific rules and

format or informal argument that allows spontaneous and casual exchange of ideas. The action-

based argumentation is called ‘debate’ (SAGE Publications, 2020). It is an important component

of argumentation as it serves as a platform of presenting and defending arguments. Debate

occurs in any way and forms as much as argumentation. When people use argumentation on all

reason-based advocacy, it offers a potential debate (SAGE Publications, 2020). This evidently

makes people argue and debate almost everyday. Debate being an important component that

would make an individual good at argumentation involves making a range of context and

formats, may it be in written, speeches, or day-to-day conversations.

2. Benefits of Argumentation

According to Edward Z. Rowell (1932, as cited by SAGE Publications), “Argument is a part of

the real business of living. It serves us in our daily tasks, in our perplexities, in our disputes, in

our search for truth, and in the promotion of our interests.” This implies that there are different

benefits in learning argumentation as scholars. Our doings in our everyday life only means that
we have processed argumentation and that we have cultivated debate skills. Below are the

benefits of learning argumentation that was consolidated as group of scholars:

A. Skills as Empowering

Scholars are known to be good at making their voices heard whenever they are fighting for

something socially, politically, economically, and even culturally. Learning argumentation as a

scholar empowers you as an arguer. It teaches you to give your energy, focus, and time for you

to be able to know your argument enough that it gives you power in making reasoned decisions.

According to SAGE Publications (2020), Empowement means that you have the skills when you

encounter in an argument in the society. It means that you are trained enough to dissect

problems, identify its root causes, and empowered enough to lead and engage yourself with the

ideas of others.

B. Skills as Productive

Peoductivity is an essential skill to have as a scholar. It helps individuals in maximizing their

time to hone their skills and to learn things that would help them accelerate especially, in

argumentation. Having this skill makes a scholar adaptable in seeing perspectives, in

communicating different aspect of the argument, and being flexible using the available and

accessible information instead of being inflexible. SAGE Publications (2020) mentioned that

being able to understand how arguments work, arguers can definitely think an evidence that

would lead up to their conclusion. Voss (2006 as cited by Iwuanyanwu) said that when a solution

is proposed, it usually is justified by arguments and/or counterarguments that indicate why the

solution is reasonable. Productivity is not just about the quantity of the argument an individual

make, it is also about the quality of your argument despite being alone.
 C. Skills as Democratic

Scholarly knowledge can be learned through justifying and evaluating (Jin et al., 2015 as cited

by Iwuanyanwu) but it does not stop there. Argumentation teaches the scholars to be democratic

through experiences, interests, and being aware of your responsibility as a citizen of your

country. It includes your personality or character as an arguer. Argumentation trains you to

interact with different perspectives while valuing their voice as much as you value yours (SAGE

Publications, 2020). It teaches an individual to be accountable and to be responsible to voice out

their opinion rather than listening as it will help more on strengthening the fight of the opressed

in specific situations. It is important as an scholar to know their rights and to fight for it as you

are the educated and more capable to be involve.

3. Three Spheres of Argumentation

Spheres of Argument describe the areas that arguments tend to occur (Hallsby, 2022). These

Spheres of Argument are discussed in the contexts of the personal, the technical, and the public

sphere.

3.1. Personal Sphere

The personal sphere is all about the personal areas of our lives, including our relationships with

friends and family. For example, when you have an argument with your friend, you usually want

to work things out on a personal level rather than letting it turn into a bigger fight. In these

situations, the major objective is usually to keep the relationship intact and prioritizing your

personal peace and emotional being. In this context, the main goal of conversation is to promote
a more in-depth personal comprehension of other people. Its outcome basically benefits you and

your personal space only.

3.2. Public Sphere

Differently, the public sphere functions as a venue for resolving conflicts that transcend the

personal or technical domains. In order to achieve a shared understanding and solution, these

talks address more general societal concerns and policies. For instance, a large number of young

people actively participated in the 2022 election, voicing their thoughts about what they think is

right and who they think is the right person to lead our country. They were crucial in determining

how the election turned out, whether they did it through attending protests, sharing their opinions

on social media, or casting their votes. The outcome of this sphere mainly focuses for the good

of all people.

3.3. Technical Sphere

The technical sphere is distinguished from both the public and personal spheres by its emphasis

on specialist knowledge. Engaging in technical discussions requires participation in the topic

matter and fluency in related terms. Similar to competing for student government, the effort goes

beyond individual goals as it includes the wider objectives of the university as a whole. In order

to run for a student government position, one must support policies and programs that are

beneficial to both the student population and oneself. It's a space where only individuals with the

equitable skills and language understanding can make significant contributions to others. The

outcome of this sphere targets only a specific group of people and usually ends the conversation

with professionalism.
 4. Importance of Mode of Argumentation

Knowing the different ways how the argumentation spheres are used is important when it comes

to discussion, whether it be in conversation, debate, or negotiation. Every domain contains

different characteristics, tactics, and goals that mold the structure of communication and

eventually impact the results. Through analyzing each sphere, we can obtain understanding of

the different strategies utilized to express, justify, or balance opposing viewpoints, thus

providing light on the complex interactions among argumentations.

4.1. Approach in Conversation

Ideas, opinions, and information are frequently shared informally during casual interactions. The

approach used is usually more free-form, with individuals exchanging ideas without following a

set agenda or structure. Individuals in active listening concentrate on establishing connections,

keeping a light tone, and comprehending one another's points of view. Effective interactions

require active listening, empathy, and respect for differing opinions.

4.2. Approach in Debate

Arguments, counter arguments, and rebuttals are presented by individuals in a debate according

to a specified timeline and structure. It is associated in a formal and specialized mode of

argumentation. Debaters often do detailed background research, foresee potential objections, and

gather data to back up their assertions. In order to effectively build strong arguments and counter

opponents' ideas, they also employ rhetorical devices, logical reasoning, and critical thinking. A

moderator, on the other hand, might oversee fairness, enforce the rules, and encourage

productive discussion during formal debates.

 4.3. Approach in Negotiation

Through compromise and communication, mutually beneficial agreements are reached during

negotiations. To find common ground, the parties try to understand each other's priorities,

interests, and limitations. In order to resolve competing interests, negotiators consider a range of

choices, come up with creative solutions, and assess decisions. This must always be open for

discission and leaning more on a democratic type of argumentation. Negotiators must employ

active listening, persuasion, and negotiating strategies. Building a connection and trust is

essential to successful negotiations because it promotes cooperation and makes agreement easier

to reach.

5. Essence of Debate

Debates are like discussions that help solve problems by using creative thinking skills and

improving your ability to express ideas. According to the QatarDebate Center (n.d.), debates can

be formal competitions where people argue directly with strict implementation of rules or a more

casual competition in arguing about an idea that is only light and usually do not have any rules

that needs to be followed. As a scholar, participating in any kind of debate helps you to think

logically to understand issues and encourage you to speak and listen clearly.

5.1. Formal Debate

Formal debates are the ones that are usually held in a venue that have specific layout.

Implementation of rules and the use of language are highly observed. People in formal debates

usually present well-researched arguments with evidence and logic. The main goal of a formal

debate is to convince the audience and judges by thoroughly and systematically examining the
topic. It is also important to note that in formal debate, there is a rubric that would be the

indicator if your argument or team had defended your topic well.

5.2. Informal Debate

Informal debates are more relaxed and casual. It still involves rules but only to keep the

discussion professional and instill respect with your fellow debators. In informal debates, people

might not have thoroughly researched arguments, and the focus is often on personal opinions and

experiences. The tone is less formal, creating a comfortable and conversational atmosphere.

Unlike formal debates, informal ones don't have a fixed structure, and participants can have a

back-and-forth discussion without strict time limits.

6. Terminologies in Argumentation

Not only is it useful for academic purposes to comprehend and apply argumentation language,

but it’s also an effective tool for critical thinking and successful communication. It helps you in

clarity and precision, critical analysis. In building strong arguments, engaging in a productive

debate, and lastly, it is also a lifelong learning especially when you learn it.

6.1. Clarity and precision

Clarity and precision since argumentation terminology contributes to the construction of good

arguments, much as building a home without understanding the terms for "saw," "hammer," and

"foundation." Using precise terminology such as "fallacy," "counterargument," and "burden of

proof" helps you to avoid ambiguity and communicate your views clearly. This ensures mutual
understanding and keeps your argument from being readily misunderstood, as Stephen Toulmin

contends in The Uses of Argument (1958).

6.2. Critical Analysis

Critical analysis is a huge factor in argumentation since critical analysis in a critical analysis, you

evaluate whether the author effectively presents a case for the argument or claim through a

logical presentation of strong arguments supported by relevant evidence. Terminology gives you

the tools to analyze arguments persuasively. Knowing phrases like "ad hominem," which refers

to attacking the opponent rather than the argument, and "strawman," which refers to distorting

the opponent's position, gives you the ability to spot logical fallacies and deceptive strategies. As

Graham Walton pointed out in Informal Logic (1996), being aware of these fallacies helps you to

be a more critical reader by enabling you to assess arguments based on their substance rather

than their emotional appeals.

6.3. Building Strong Arguments

Building strong arguments can help you construct a claim that can help you in an argument

especially in a debate, may it be formal or informal. Acquiring knowledge of language facilitates

the creation of coherent and convincing arguments. Words like "conclusion," "premise," and

"inference" help you build a coherent flow of ideas. Additionally, as stated in Wayne Booth,

Gregory Colomb, and Joseph Williams' The Craft of Research (2008), knowing ideas like

"analogy" and "induction" empowers you to produce strong supporting evidence.

6.4. Engaging in a productive debate

Engaging in productive debate Common terminology serves as a means of communication

during conversations, promoting a fruitful exchange of ideas. By using clear language, you can

avoid misunderstandings and promote courteous discussion where you can concentrate on the

main points of contention rather than becoming bogged down in details. This is consistent with

the work of Douglas Walton and Eric Krabbe, who stress the value of transparent

communication in resolving conflicts in a constructive manner in their book Informal Fallacies

(1995).

6.5. Lifelong learning

It is a lifelong learning since arguments are not limited to the classroom. It gives you the tools to

evaluate debates that you come across in a variety of settings, such as news stories and online

forums. As Peter Elbow pointed out in Reasoning Writing (1989), this helps you develop critical

thinking abilities for life and equips you to function in a world that is getting more and more

information-rich.

7. Philosophy of Stoicism for Argumentation and Debates

The ancient Greek concept of stoicism is very helpful for debating and arguing points. Stoicism

encourages a cool, collected frame of mind when engaging in conversation through fostering

reason and emotional detachment. People prioritize ethical behavior when virtue is emphasized,

which promotes constructive dialogue. The stoic acceptance of the uncontrollable helps the

resolution of difficult situations by preventing emotional turmoil.

8. Conclusion
In a nutshell, both formal and informal debates offer different ways to express ideas and

understand different viewpoints. Debate has enduring value. In its many manifestations, debate

provides a potent instrument for successful communication and lifetime learning in addition to

academic achievement. Learning the language of argumentation helps us develop our critical

thinking skills, make compelling arguments, have fruitful conversations, and eventually navigate

the challenges of a world full of information. While informal conversations encourage flexibility

and open-mindedness, formal debates sharpen our research and reasoning abilities. But there's

one thing that unites them both: a desire to learn and an openness to hearing different points of

view. This endeavor, driven by the stoic values of reason, emotional restraint, and moral

behavior, makes sure that our discussions are fruitful, enhancing personal development and

cultivating respect for one another. Recall that argument is an exploration voyage rather than a

contest won or lost. We begin a lifelong learning process as we arm ourselves with the stoic

attitude and the language of argumentation. This process not only enables us to take part in

arguments but also to help create a society that is more informed and civil. Permit the

conversation to go on, as there is room for advancement and comprehension inside its pages. To

sum up, stoicism offers a strong foundation for fair and moral discussion and arguments. This

conclusion provides a last, powerful takeaway message while incorporating the main ideas of

your essay. It also highlights the ongoing nature of education and the benefits of responsible

discussion for society as a whole.

References:

Bhandari, P. (2023, June 22). What is deductive reasoning? | explanation & examples.

Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/deductive-reasoning/#:~:text=Deductive

%20reasoning%20is%20a%20logical,Note

Bhandari, P. (2023, June 22). Inductive Reasoning | Types, examples, explanation.

Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/inductive-reasoning/#:~:text=is

%20inductive%20reasoning%3F-,Inductive%20reasoning%20is%20a%20method%20of

%20drawing%20conclusions%20by%20going,logic%20or%20bottom%2Dup

%20reasoning.

(Bolivar, et al., 2024).

 Logic - by branch / doctrine - the basics of philosophy. (n.d.).

https://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_logic.html

Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Argumentation. In Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Retrieved

February 19, 2024, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/argumentation

Sage Publications Inc. (2020). Introduction to Argumentation and Debate.

https://www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/98851_Chapter_1_Introduction

_to_Argumentation_and_Debate_from_Drury_Argumentation_in_Everyday_Life_1e.pdf

University Writing Center. (2015). Three Appeals of Argument.

http://www.uwc.ucf.edu/hadouts/Three_Appeals_Argument.pdf

What is Debate ? – QatarDebate Center. (n.d.). https://qatardebate.org/what-is-debate/

The craft of research, fourth edition. University of Chicago Press. (2016, October 1).

https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo23521678.html

APA PsycNet. (n.d.). https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-03523-000

Toulmin, S. E. (n.d.). The uses of argument. Cambridge Core.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/uses-of-argument/26CF801BC12004587B66778297D55

67C
 The craft of research, fourth edition. University of Chicago Press. (2016, October 1).

https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo23521678.html

., F. H. (2017, December). (PDF) Argumentation Theory and Argumentative Practices: A Vital but

Complex Relationship. ResearchGate.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322028257_Argumentation_Theory_and_Argumentati

ve_Practices_A_Vital_but_Complex_Relationship

Hallsby, A. (2022, August 11). Chapter 7: Rhetoric and Argumentation. Pressbooks.

https://open.lib.umn.edu/rhetoricaltheory/chapter/chapter-7-rhetoric-and-argumentation/

Krabbe, E. C., & van Laar, J. A. (2018, April 24). The Role of Argument in Negotiation. Springer Link.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10503-018-9458-x

Novaes, C. D. (2021, July 16). Argument and Argumentation (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/argument/