Toulmin 1

I liked most of what Toulmin had to say…his ideas on substantial and analytic arguments seem to make sense. Arguments should be judged by substance and less on situation. Theoretical arguments can get confusing. Is killing wrong? Yes/no. regardless of how you answer that a master of the Socratic Method is going to turn you inside out! But since Rhetoric is less a part of Philosophy now than of English I will not belabor that point. I don’t agree with Toulmin trying to get rid of an entire method or approach to arguments. His ideas that syllogism are wrong or useless is incorrect. The notion that people are mortal and thus Socrates is going/did die is correct. I’m more of a moderate. I don’t like to argue, I don’t like to blame, I don’t like to get rid of methods, and I don’t like to talk about why I think the things that I think. In short every method has value. Some may be more relevant, but how can we get rid of one method! One man’s trash is another’s treasure. For Toulmin to argue that one method is weaker, supporters of that method argue back in sharp contrast. And thus we are stuck in mediocracy! Ah…It’s bliss…Yes I was there for the speech about mediocracy and I watched it live the first time around!