Stephen Toulmin was a British philosopher, author, and educator who sought to understand the analysis of moral reasoning. The Toulmin model was later found to be useful for the analysis of of rhetorical arguments. Rhetoric, or the art of persuasive speaking, is one of those classes that you notice existing in college, but never really think of again. But maybe you should. Understanding arguments can be helpful not only in such cases as making a great presentation at work, but can also help you decipher others arguments so the wrong ones don't pull you in. Being good at persuasive speaking can help get you that raise. And understanding the building blocks of arguments can help you defend yourself against them.
Of course a great example of the need for understanding and analyzing arguments is the internet. I know you have seen thousand of posts on Facebook that people have reposted without checking the facts of the claim. And if you've browsed any forum at all you've seen the thousands of arguments and counter arguments in the comment section, and sadly many of these arguments can't even hold water. There are a plethora of weak arguments out there on the internet without any evidence at all. And there are others whose facts aren't actually facts. Many of these you can tell are false just from personal knowledge or quickly googling the stated evidence. But it is when the evidence seems good that understanding the building blocks of arguments can really come in handy to understand the flaw that you suspect might be there.
And, who knows, maybe understanding and making solid arguments will become your thing, and you will be the one that no one can out argue in the comment section. But just a piece of advice, the best persuaders will be believed to have the readers interests at heart. So while you're building up your rhetoric, build up your ethos as well.
Basics of the Toulmin Model In any good argument the reason should not only support the claim, but it should be built on solid assumptions(warrents), as well as having solid evidence to back it up. There are two other parts to Toulmin's model those being qualifiers, that which limits or clarifies the claim, and rebuttals in anticipation of counter arguments.
Interviews aren't the great joy of my life. I tend to go mind blank at the strangest time. And the amount of tension in my body is phenomenal. Unless I can distract myself I also tend to go into hyperventilation. But my recent experience with an online interviewing teaching aid makes me wonder if online interviewing might not be an answer to many of my problems.
While using this online technology on a mock interview for a class I was taking I found that I found talking to a camera to be much easier that talking to real people. But I do wonder how much of what I learned from the experience would actually apply in a situation where I am doing a live video conference, such as with using Skype where there is an actual person on the other side of your screen.
Can the internet allow us to see what people think? In general I would say yes, people are posting their thoughts, their beliefs, and sometimes their rage. But it really depends, both on the person who is posting (some are good at hiding their thoughts) and on the readers perception (some people can't see their way out of a paper bag).
In any relationship, whether it is online or in person, you should always be aware of what and how much you are saying. You should understand the repercussions that can happen by giving too much information to the wrong person. And just like you don't talk smack about someone (like say your boss) where the wrong person might overhear, you should be aware that the same is true of the internet. Most sites on the internet are not private and you should never treat them like they are. You need to pay attention and monitor yourself. "Self-monitoring usually makes people more competent communicators because it enables them to see how their behavior fits or doesn’t fit in a given social setting" (Floyd, 27).