how to make and use argument maps

5/24/2018 How to Make and Use Argument Maps

1/56

Target audience: everyone interested,

no special knowledge necessary

Reading time: about 20-25 minutes

Page layout: allows easy reading without scrolling, even on very small screens

uthor: !dgar "artel

#ate: published $ovember 20%&

Terms: 'ree 'or non-commercial use commercial use re*uires sep

+reative +ommons &0 npo ttribution - $on+ommercial

BY NC SA

CC $

How to make and use argument maps

Avoid endless discussions


2/56

e'ore we begin,you may want to know this:

This te1t is a (slightly edited) e1cerpt'rom the book#ecision making, politics and *uality o' li'e by !dgar "arte

3ost e1amples, and all persons or organi4ationsappearing in them, are invented


3/56

+hapters

% ntroduction - short one

2 Problems ll sorts, all si4es 6here do they come 'rom7

& 6hat is a good or bad decision7 de'initions interme44o

8 6hat happens when bad decisions are made 're*uently7

bout circles and spirals

5 "ow can bad decisions be avoided7 short answer

9 6hich 'actors hinder good decision making7 - n overview

"ow to overcome the 'actors that hinder good decision making pproaches and methods

%0 +onclusion - short one

; n appeal: how youcan contribute etter decisions, less problems

uality o' .i'e

by

!dgar "artel

BY NC SA

CC $

>uality o' li The most im

s there a m "ow to solv problems

+ #o not crea solving the 6here is th

# =actors tha making -

! >uality stan decision ma 6hat they

= "ow to visu decision op

? "ow to mak argument m void endle

" 3iscellaneo cknowled contact in'o

" 3iscellaneo cknowled

contact in'o


4/56

!stimated reading time: 20-25 minutes

How to make and use argument maps

void endless discussions


5/56

#iscussions have animportant role in our lives

They in'luence our thinking,

our social relations, ourdecision makingand our actions

Publicdiscussions (or debates)o'ten precede and in'luence

politicaldecision making

6hich again a''ects us

There'ore it is in our bethat discussions giv

results nstead o' ma us, or simply wasting

This te1t is mostlydiagrams that can helpbetter (and shorter) di


6/56

ut be'ore making any diagrams

we need to 'ind out what toe1pect 'rom a better discussion

'ter that, we need to takea *uick look at which reality

these diagrams re'lect

$ote:

The diagram types income in addition

(multi-party) decisionintroduced in append

original book

Rather use those mi' the discussion is

choosing between decis


7/56

Progress

ntro done

bout discussions up ne1t#iagrams and reality (yours or mine7)

rgument mapsrgument evaluation

rgument evaluation diagrams


8/56

n an idealdiscussion,the participants:

% talk@write about a precisely

de'ined topic, and nothing else

2 agree on the purpose o' the discussion

& treat each other with respect

8 e1press themselves clearly

5 consider each others and arguments with o

9 come to their conclus they have heard and all arguments

and

do all this without wa


9/56

n real li'ediscussions,the participants o'ten do

e1actly the opposite

/ometimes in all aspects

Results, i' any, are accordingly

n'ortunately, because thishappens so o'ten, it is widely

considered as normal andacceptable behaviour

Real li'e discussionsrather debate

n a debate, the par

try to convince eac(or at least their auo' their opposingpo

rguments are to attackor de'endp

rather than to arrwell-'ounded conc


10/56

ack to the discussions

There is no practical way to ensurethat discussion participants behaveideally as outlined 2 pages be'ore

ut there are at least & approachesthat can help

% educationand traininwhen started at ea

2 discussion ru

& visuali4ationtech

6hen combined, these bring ideal discussions w

ut already one o' themmake a discussion


11/56

pproach % re*uires long-termthinking and much preparation

pproaches % and 2re*uire either authority

over (potential) participants,or their 'ull cooperation

pproach & does neither

6hether you are a participant oran audience member, you can

always listen to what is said andmake a diagram o' it

3ore precisely, yo

- 'ollow the discu

- e1tract claims, argumevaluations 'ro

- convert that in'ormavisual 'orm (a dia

- make the diagram(sto participants and a


12/56

ut how can a diagram help tomake a discussion better7

good discussion supportdiagramdoes not reproduceverbal smoke screens,

other rhetorical tricks, insultsand o''-topic statements

"ence it can give better overview,

clarityand 'ocus

nd once the participthat an argument ha

registered in a diagramre'rain 'rom repea

The ideal discussion%, &, 8, maybe 9, and

could bene'it 'rom

lot more could be sdiscussions ut that

the scope o' this


13/56

Progress

ntro done

bout discussions done#iagrams and reality (yours or mine7) up ne1t

rgument mapsrgument evaluation



14/56

$o two persons have e1actly thesame perception o' reality

/omething consider as 'act, you

might consider as someonesopinion /omething you consider

as valid conclusion, mightconsider 'ar-'etched nd so on

This can easily lead tomisunderstandings, con'usion

and@or con'licts

To avoid these, the maker (ideally: all di

participants) must und

di''erence between oband interpretatio

Aour observationsare'ive senses tell you

Aour interpretations

your mind makes o


15/56

Observations vs. interpretations(eamples!

The man smiled a'ter he boarded the train

The man was happy a'ter he boarded the train

The man was happy because he didnt have to wait 'or the ne1t train

smiled a'ter he boarded the trainwickedlyThe man

These satellite photos show troops leaving their usual positions

prove that an attack is imminentThese satellite photos

=ig ?%a : observations vs interpretations (e1amples)

The grecontain o(source:

Aellowcontain int

(source:

Bbservation

agree onthanand genermore reliab


16/56

Observations vs. interpretations(eamples!

The man smiled a'ter he boarded the train

The man was happy a'ter he boarded the train

The man was happy because he didnt have to wait 'or the ne1t train

smiled a'ter he boarded the trainwickedlyThe man

These satellite photos show troops leaving their usual positions

prove that an attack is imminentThese satellite photos

=ig ?%b : observations vs interpretations (e1amples)

$ot%00C pure

can be ha

>uite o'tetraces o' i

blended with

Dust think ab

smiled 'rom the


17/56

6hat bearing does all this haveon the making o' argument maps

(and similar diagrams)7

%ecause the diagram

needs to summari4e@arguments presented

such diagrams caobservation on

2"owever, i' the diagra

'ollows a suitable codethe diagram will c

a neutral view


18/56

&' not, such diagramscould be abused 'or

(public) opinion manipulation

8There'ore it must alwaysbe clear to the audiencewho made the diagram,

and which (i' any) code o' conduct

the diagram maker adhered to

5These diagrams will per'ectly true in a sc

philosophical se

Aet they can be veryin practice


19/56

Progress

ntro done

bout discussions done#iagrams and reality (yours or mine7) done

rgument maps up ne1trgument evaluation



20/56

rgument maps can have variouslayouts The ones in this te1t are

optimi4ed 'or easy access

3ost people will understand themwithout e1tra e1planations

This is important,because di''icult to readdiagramso'ten end up not being read, or notbeing understood n both cases

they become useless

Please note that the ndo not e1plain how

an argument map, bmakeone


21/56

>uestion with2 possible answers

(eg yes@no)

no

yes

the answercould be

the answercould be

=ig ?2a : argument map (basic structure)

Argument map(basic structure!

The starting point'or this type o' argument ma

is the discussed *uestion

est suited are *uestionswith 2 possible answers

' the discussion has alreadytaken place, but without a clea

e1pressed topic *uestion, thi*uestion must be constructe

a'terwards


22/56


(eg yes@no)

no

yes

the answercould be

the answercould be

=ig ?2b : argument map (basic structure)

Argument map(basic structure! t is very important that the

*uestion is:

% precisely phrased(must be answerable, withou

the need 'or lo'ty assumption

2 neutrally phrased(must not indicate

a pre'erred answer)

& immediately understandab'or the target audience


23/56


(eg yes@no)

no

yes

the answercould be

the answercould be

=ig ?2c : argument map (basic structure)

Argument map(basic structure! ad e1amples:

re young people la4y7

/hould private investors 'inally a chance to run our water sup

in'rastructure more e''iciently

?ood e1ample:

/hould bc +ity sell

its water supply in'rastructurto private investors7


24/56


(eg yes@no)

no

yes

argument 'or yes

argument 'or yes

argument 'or no

argument 'or no

%st orderarguments

main arguments

the answercould be

the answercould be

=ig ?2d : argument map (basic structure)

argument 'or yes

because

because


$e1t, argumensupporting an ans

They are the mai

ll arguments areaccording to the

suppo

$ote that thesmust not indicate a

(as eg red or g


25/56


(eg yes@no)

no

yes

argument 'or yes

argument againstyes-argument


argument 'or yes

argument againstno-argument

argument 'or no

argument 'or no

%st orderarguments

sub-argume

2nd orderarguments

main arguments

the answercould be

the answercould be argument 'or

argument 'or no


=ig ?2e : argument map (basic structure)

argument 'or yes

because

because

because

but

but

but


3aino'ten dicteby

(argum

re'erri


26/56


(eg yes@no)

no

yes

argument 'or yes



argument 'or yes


argument 'or no

argument 'or no

%st orderarguments

sub-argume

2nd orderarguments

main arguments

the answercould be


argument 'or no


=ig ?2' : argument map (basic structure)

argument 'or yes

because

because

because

but


&rd o

are a

8thargum

e

discer

but

but

i


27/56


(eg yes@no)

no

yes

argument 'or yes



argument 'or yes


argument 'or no

argument 'or no

%st orderarguments

sub-argume

2nd orderarguments

main arguments

the answercould be


argument 'or no


=ig ?2g : argument map (basic structure)

argument 'or yes

because

because

because

but

but

but

but


but

but


28/56

s driver orpassenger in a

moving car,should you wear

a seat belt7

no

yesin an accident, your body

might otherwise hit@inEureother people in the car but

tra''ic regulations re*uireit (depending on country)

escape 'roma submerged car

is easier without seat belt

it looks coolernot to wear a seat belt

(to some people)

the answercould be

less than %Co' all accidents involve

a submerged car

in most places, tra''icaccidents are much morelikely than such assaults

it can save you 'rom long-lasting health problems

a'ter an accident

it can save your li'ein an accident

escape 'rom a carassaulted by criminals


accident probabilityis very low

Argument map(eample "!

=ig ?& : argument map (e1ample %)

the answercould be

but

but but

but

but

but

it is inconvenientnot much,

once you are used to it

but

to other people,not wearing a seat belt

looks stupidbecause

because

t l lth it i th i i ht t tA t

b t b t


29/56

/houldpersonal wealthbe legally limitedto 500 times the

national average7

no

yese1treme economic

ine*uality can causesocial unrest

but social unrest is causedby poverty, not by wealth

500 times the averagewealth should satis'y

every imaginable need

the *uest 'or moremay serve this purpose,the *uest 'or e1tremely

much does not

more personal wealth isan important driving 'orce'or economic development

personal wealth is a 'ormo' personal 'reedom

the answer

could be

personal 'reedom isactually limited by law

economic developmentis no goal in itsel'

this idea isborn 'rom envy

i' envy were animportant 'actor, the limit

would be 'ar lower

such a limit ishard to implement

there are hundreds o'implemented regulationsthat are more comple1

e1treme wealth givestoo much economic power

to very 'ew persons

e1tremely wealthy personscan buy political decisions

e1tremely wealthy persons

o'ten donate much money'or good causes

with a wealth limit,

donations will increase(i' only to avoid ta1es)

it is their right to e1ertin'luence with legal means

these persons arebetter *uali'ied than

most others 'or this Eob

Argument map(eample #!

because

because

=ig ?8a : argument map (e1ample 2)

the answercould be

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

t l lth it i th i i ht t tA t

but but


30/56


national average7

no

yese1treme economic






much does not



the answer

could be





would be 'ar lower




to very 'ew persons










because

because

=ig ?8b : argument map (e1ample 2)

the answercould be

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

ll arguments mustconcisely, and witho

approval or re


31/56

Aou can clearly see the lines o'argumentsin either e1ample

6ith an argument map,you can understand a discussion

in 2-5 minutes

6ithout one, you probably wouldhave to listen or read 'or hours

nd you might even end up

with con'usion rather thanunderstanding

$ote that you also cargument maps 'or dwith yoursel' n that

could e''ectively clear by making on

(t takes about &0-;0

e1tremely wealthy persons it is their right to e1ertA t

but but


32/56


national average7

no

yese1treme economic






much does not



the answer

could be





would be 'ar lower




to very 'ew persons










because

because

=ig ?8c : argument map (e1ample 2)

the answercould be

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

but

This map shows 2& argumeand their logical connection

but would still 'it com'ortably

single [email protected] pag

(or about hal' that pagewhen using a typical newspa

'ont si4e o'


33/56

'ter reading an argument map,you will have a 'irst impressiono' which answer you 'ind better

supported

#epending on the situation, andon how clear your impression is,

you must decide whether closer evaluation is needed

rgument evaluation is subEect

o' the ne1t pages

lternatively you couthe criteriaused in a

and put them in a deci(where the possible

become option

+riteria'rom the e1ample - accident survival cha - health status a'ter ac - convenience - coolness o' appeara ()

Bptions'rom the e1ampl - wear a seat belt - dont wear a seat b


34/56

Progress

ntro done


rgument maps donergument evaluation up ne1t



35/56

The resulto' an argumentevaluation depends not Eust onthe argument, but also on the

evaluating person

Thats because di''erent personshave di''erent reality perceptions

and value systems(we 'ind di''erent things important)

Bther persons therenot necessarily mistake

Eust because they

at di''erent res

' you want to critici4eevaluation result, you sit clear whether you disthe underlying value s

with the evaluation me


36/56

$ow lets have a lookat one o' these methods

simple and e''icieo' evaluating an ar

is to ask and answethree *uestion

A t l ti


37/56

777

not valid

% #o you considerthe argument as true7

no

yes

cantanswer

=ig ?5a: argument evaluation 'lowchart

summari4ed argumenttakeusually the 'orm o' a stateme

' you consider it as true,perhaps giving it the bene'it o' d

proceed to the 2 *uestion(ne1t page)

Btherwise the evaluation is

completed

!ach gray bo1 shows a possievaluation result

Argument evaluation(lowc%art!

A t l ti


38/56

777

not valid


no

2 #o you considerit as relevant7

yes

cantanswer

=ig ?5b: argument evaluation 'lowchart

no

cantanswer

yes

' you consider therelevant (having a topic), proceed to t

gain you mthe bene'it o

Btherwise the ecomple


A t l ti


39/56

777

validF

not important

vaF

impovalidnot valid


no


& "ow importantis it to you7

yes

cantanswer

=ig ?5c: argument evaluation 'lowchart

not important importan(de'ault)

no

cantanswer

yes

$ow your personakicks in with 'ull

determines yo


Argument evaluation


40/56

777

validF

not important

vaF

impovalidnot valid


no


& "ow importantis it to you7

yes

cantanswer

=ig ?5d: argument evaluation 'lowchart

not important importan

no

cantanswer

yes


(de'ault)

&plicit evaluation eamp


41/56

s that true7 Aes, at least som s it relevant7 Aes s it important7 $o, not to mes driver or

passenger in amoving car,

should you weara seat belt7

no

=ig ?9a : e1plicit evaluation e1amples

the answercould be

it is inconvenient


because



42/56

s that true7 Aes s it relevant7 $o

s that true7 $o

s that true7 Aes, at least som s it relevant7 Aes s it important7 $o, not to me

s that true7 Aes, probably s it relevant7 $ot very, but still s it important7 m not sure


moving car,


no

=ig ?9b : e1plicit evaluation e1amples

the answercould be

seat belts o'ten tear

apart in serious accidents

seat belts add weightto the car



it is inconvenient


because

These two argument'or demonstration pur



43/56

s that true7 Aes s it relevant7 $o

s that true7 $o

s that true7 Aes, at least som s it relevant7 Aes s it important7 $o, not to me

s that true7 Aes, probably s it relevant7 $ot very, but still s it important7 m not sure


moving car,


no

=ig ?9c : e1plicit evaluation e1amples

the answercould be

seat belts o'ten tear

apart in serious accidents

seat belts add weightto the car



it is inconvenient


because


44/56

Progress

ntro done


rgument maps donergument evaluation done

rgument evaluation diagrams up ne1t


45/56

6e know aboutargument mapsand about

argument evaluation

.ets see how webring them toge

in a diagram

A t


46/56

=ig ?a : argument evaluations diagram




a seat belt7

no

yesin an accident, your bodymight otherwise hit@inEure

other people in the car

but





(to some people)

the answercould be

leso' all a

a su

in mosaccidentlikely tha


a'ter an accident




accidi

because

the answercould be

but

but

but

but

but

it is inconvenientn

once yobut

to onot wea

lobecause

Argument evaluations(eample "!



a seat belt7

no

yes in an accident, your bodymight otherwise hit@inEure






(to some people)

the answercould be


a'ter an accident




because

the answercould be

it is inconvenient

because

Bur new diagram starts outas a copy o' the original

argument map, but without thesub-arguments

A t


47/56

=ig ?b : argument evaluations diagram




a seat belt7

no



but





(to some people)

the answercould be

leso' all a

a su



a'ter an accident




accidi

because

the answercould be

but

but

but

but

but

it is inconvenientn

once yobut

to onot wea

lobecause




a seat belt7

no







(to some people)

the answercould be


a'ter an accident




because

the answercould be

it is inconvenient

because

not valid

validF

not important

valid

validF

not important

validF

very importan

validF

important

validF

very importan

valid

$ow there is room ne1t to themain arguments Thats where we

put our evaluation results

A t


48/56

=ig ?c : argument evaluations diagram




a seat belt7

no



but





(to some people)

the answercould be

leso' all a

a su



a'ter an accident




accidi

because

the answercould be

but

but

but

but

but

it is inconvenientn

once yobut

to onot wea

lobecause




a seat belt7

no







(to some people)

the answercould be


a'ter an accident




because

the answercould be

it is inconvenient

because

not valid

validF

not important

valid

validF

not important

validF

very importan

validF

important

validF

very importan

valid

B' course we must consider all

connected sub-argumentswhenevaluating a main argument

ut usually we dont need toinclude individual sub-argument

evaluations in the diagram

This way we get a much simplerdiagram than otherwise

'ultipart)

rgument evaluations by party


49/56



a seat belt7

no

yesin an accident, your bodymight otherwise hit@inEureother people in the car





(to some people)

the answercould be

it can save you 'romlong-lasting health problems

a'ter an accident




'ultipart)argument evaluation

(eample "!

=ig ?


50/56



a seat belt7

no

yesin an accident, your bodymight otherwise hit@inEureother people in the car





(to some people)

the answercould be

it can save you 'romlong-lasting health problems

a'ter an accident




'ultipart)argument evaluation

(eample "!

=ig ?


51/56


52/56


53/56


54/56


55/56

$ow lets take a step back'rom the details and do some

summing up

3any normal discussionssu''er

'rom empty talk, manipulationattempts, poor reasoning,

personal insults, hidden agendasor lack o' 'ocus and overview

/uch discussions can

take a long time,without giving use'ul results

' the topic is impand you can cho

consider this alter

% make an argumen

2 evaluate the main & draw your conclus

Dust 'or yourselin cooperation with

n most cases you will'ounded results within


56/56

This is the last pageo' this e1cerpt

' youve read it: Thank you

how to make and use argument maps

Documents

use argument maps

use commercial use

mak argument

problemsuality o

purpose o

uality o li

bad decisions

n appeal