argument in speech

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

11.2 Persuasive Speaking

Learning objectives.

• Explain how claims, evidence, and warrants function to create an argument.
• Identify strategies for choosing a persuasive speech topic.
• Identify strategies for adapting a persuasive speech based on an audience’s orientation to the proposition.
• Distinguish among propositions of fact, value, and policy.
• Choose an organizational pattern that is fitting for a persuasive speech topic.

We produce and receive persuasive messages daily, but we don’t often stop to think about how we make the arguments we do or the quality of the arguments that we receive. In this section, we’ll learn the components of an argument, how to choose a good persuasive speech topic, and how to adapt and organize a persuasive message.

Foundation of Persuasion

Persuasive speaking seeks to influence the beliefs, attitudes, values, or behaviors of audience members. In order to persuade, a speaker has to construct arguments that appeal to audience members. Arguments form around three components: claim, evidence, and warrant. The claim is the statement that will be supported by evidence. Your thesis statement is the overarching claim for your speech, but you will make other claims within the speech to support the larger thesis. Evidence , also called grounds, supports the claim. The main points of your persuasive speech and the supporting material you include serve as evidence. For example, a speaker may make the following claim: “There should be a national law against texting while driving.” The speaker could then support the claim by providing the following evidence: “Research from the US Department of Transportation has found that texting while driving creates a crash risk that is twenty-three times worse than driving while not distracted.” The warrant is the underlying justification that connects the claim and the evidence. One warrant for the claim and evidence cited in this example is that the US Department of Transportation is an institution that funds research conducted by credible experts. An additional and more implicit warrant is that people shouldn’t do things they know are unsafe.

Figure 11.2 Components of an Argument

The quality of your evidence often impacts the strength of your warrant, and some warrants are stronger than others. A speaker could also provide evidence to support their claim advocating for a national ban on texting and driving by saying, “I have personally seen people almost wreck while trying to text.” While this type of evidence can also be persuasive, it provides a different type and strength of warrant since it is based on personal experience. In general, the anecdotal evidence from personal experience would be given a weaker warrant than the evidence from the national research report. The same process works in our legal system when a judge evaluates the connection between a claim and evidence. If someone steals my car, I could say to the police, “I’m pretty sure Mario did it because when I said hi to him on campus the other day, he didn’t say hi back, which proves he’s mad at me.” A judge faced with that evidence is unlikely to issue a warrant for Mario’s arrest. Fingerprint evidence from the steering wheel that has been matched with a suspect is much more likely to warrant arrest.

As you put together a persuasive argument, you act as the judge. You can evaluate arguments that you come across in your research by analyzing the connection (the warrant) between the claim and the evidence. If the warrant is strong, you may want to highlight that argument in your speech. You may also be able to point out a weak warrant in an argument that goes against your position, which you could then include in your speech. Every argument starts by putting together a claim and evidence, but arguments grow to include many interrelated units.

Choosing a Persuasive Speech Topic

As with any speech, topic selection is important and is influenced by many factors. Good persuasive speech topics are current, controversial, and have important implications for society. If your topic is currently being discussed on television, in newspapers, in the lounges in your dorm, or around your family’s dinner table, then it’s a current topic. A persuasive speech aimed at getting audience members to wear seat belts in cars wouldn’t have much current relevance, given that statistics consistently show that most people wear seat belts. Giving the same speech would have been much more timely in the 1970s when there was a huge movement to increase seat-belt use.

Many topics that are current are also controversial, which is what gets them attention by the media and citizens. Current and controversial topics will be more engaging for your audience. A persuasive speech to encourage audience members to donate blood or recycle wouldn’t be very controversial, since the benefits of both practices are widely agreed on. However, arguing that the restrictions on blood donation by men who have had sexual relations with men be lifted would be controversial. I must caution here that controversial is not the same as inflammatory. An inflammatory topic is one that evokes strong reactions from an audience for the sake of provoking a reaction. Being provocative for no good reason or choosing a topic that is extremist will damage your credibility and prevent you from achieving your speech goals.

You should also choose a topic that is important to you and to society as a whole. As we have already discussed in this book, our voices are powerful, as it is through communication that we participate and make change in society. Therefore we should take seriously opportunities to use our voices to speak publicly. Choosing a speech topic that has implications for society is probably a better application of your public speaking skills than choosing to persuade the audience that Lebron James is the best basketball player in the world or that Superman is a better hero than Spiderman. Although those topics may be very important to you, they don’t carry the same social weight as many other topics you could choose to discuss. Remember that speakers have ethical obligations to the audience and should take the opportunity to speak seriously.

You will also want to choose a topic that connects to your own interests and passions. If you are an education major, it might make more sense to do a persuasive speech about funding for public education than the death penalty. If there are hot-button issues for you that make you get fired up and veins bulge out in your neck, then it may be a good idea to avoid those when speaking in an academic or professional context.

Choose a persuasive speech topic that you’re passionate about but still able to approach and deliver in an ethical manner.

Michael Vadon – Nigel Farage – CC BY-SA 2.0.

Choosing such topics may interfere with your ability to deliver a speech in a competent and ethical manner. You want to care about your topic, but you also want to be able to approach it in a way that’s going to make people want to listen to you. Most people tune out speakers they perceive to be too ideologically entrenched and write them off as extremists or zealots.

You also want to ensure that your topic is actually persuasive. Draft your thesis statement as an “I believe” statement so your stance on an issue is clear. Also, think of your main points as reasons to support your thesis. Students end up with speeches that aren’t very persuasive in nature if they don’t think of their main points as reasons. Identifying arguments that counter your thesis is also a good exercise to help ensure your topic is persuasive. If you can clearly and easily identify a competing thesis statement and supporting reasons, then your topic and approach are arguable.

Review of Tips for Choosing a Persuasive Speech Topic

• Not current. People should use seat belts.
• Current. People should not text while driving.
• Not controversial. People should recycle.
• Controversial. Recycling should be mandatory by law.
• Not as impactful. Superman is the best superhero.
• Impactful. Colleges and universities should adopt zero-tolerance bullying policies.
• Unclear thesis. Homeschooling is common in the United States.
• Clear, argumentative thesis with stance. Homeschooling does not provide the same benefits of traditional education and should be strictly monitored and limited.

Adapting Persuasive Messages

Competent speakers should consider their audience throughout the speech-making process. Given that persuasive messages seek to directly influence the audience in some way, audience adaptation becomes even more important. If possible, poll your audience to find out their orientation toward your thesis. I read my students’ thesis statements aloud and have the class indicate whether they agree with, disagree with, or are neutral in regards to the proposition. It is unlikely that you will have a homogenous audience, meaning that there will probably be some who agree, some who disagree, and some who are neutral. So you may employ all of the following strategies, in varying degrees, in your persuasive speech.

When you have audience members who already agree with your proposition, you should focus on intensifying their agreement. You can also assume that they have foundational background knowledge of the topic, which means you can take the time to inform them about lesser-known aspects of a topic or cause to further reinforce their agreement. Rather than move these audience members from disagreement to agreement, you can focus on moving them from agreement to action. Remember, calls to action should be as specific as possible to help you capitalize on audience members’ motivation in the moment so they are more likely to follow through on the action.

There are two main reasons audience members may be neutral in regards to your topic: (1) they are uninformed about the topic or (2) they do not think the topic affects them. In this case, you should focus on instilling a concern for the topic. Uninformed audiences may need background information before they can decide if they agree or disagree with your proposition. If the issue is familiar but audience members are neutral because they don’t see how the topic affects them, focus on getting the audience’s attention and demonstrating relevance. Remember that concrete and proxemic supporting materials will help an audience find relevance in a topic. Students who pick narrow or unfamiliar topics will have to work harder to persuade their audience, but neutral audiences often provide the most chance of achieving your speech goal since even a small change may move them into agreement.

When audience members disagree with your proposition, you should focus on changing their minds. To effectively persuade, you must be seen as a credible speaker. When an audience is hostile to your proposition, establishing credibility is even more important, as audience members may be quick to discount or discredit someone who doesn’t appear prepared or doesn’t present well-researched and supported information. Don’t give an audience a chance to write you off before you even get to share your best evidence. When facing a disagreeable audience, the goal should also be small change. You may not be able to switch someone’s position completely, but influencing him or her is still a success. Aside from establishing your credibility, you should also establish common ground with an audience.

Build common ground with disagreeable audiences and acknowledge areas of disagreement.

Chris-Havard Berge – Shaking Hands – CC BY-NC 2.0.

Acknowledging areas of disagreement and logically refuting counterarguments in your speech is also a way to approach persuading an audience in disagreement, as it shows that you are open-minded enough to engage with other perspectives.

Determining Your Proposition

The proposition of your speech is the overall direction of the content and how that relates to the speech goal. A persuasive speech will fall primarily into one of three categories: propositions of fact, value, or policy. A speech may have elements of any of the three propositions, but you can usually determine the overall proposition of a speech from the specific purpose and thesis statements.

Propositions of fact focus on beliefs and try to establish that something “is or isn’t.” Propositions of value focus on persuading audience members that something is “good or bad,” “right or wrong,” or “desirable or undesirable.” Propositions of policy advocate that something “should or shouldn’t” be done. Since most persuasive speech topics can be approached as propositions of fact, value, or policy, it is a good idea to start thinking about what kind of proposition you want to make, as it will influence how you go about your research and writing. As you can see in the following example using the topic of global warming, the type of proposition changes the types of supporting materials you would need:

• Proposition of fact. Global warming is caused by increased greenhouse gases related to human activity.
• Proposition of value. America’s disproportionately large amount of pollution relative to other countries is wrong .
• Proposition of policy. There should be stricter emission restrictions on individual cars.

To support propositions of fact, you would want to present a logical argument based on objective facts that can then be used to build persuasive arguments. Propositions of value may require you to appeal more to your audience’s emotions and cite expert and lay testimony. Persuasive speeches about policy usually require you to research existing and previous laws or procedures and determine if any relevant legislation or propositions are currently being considered.

“Getting Critical”

Persuasion and Masculinity

The traditional view of rhetoric that started in ancient Greece and still informs much of our views on persuasion today has been critiqued for containing Western and masculine biases. Traditional persuasion has been linked to Western and masculine values of domination, competition, and change, which have been critiqued as coercive and violent (Gearhart, 1979).

Communication scholars proposed an alternative to traditional persuasive rhetoric in the form of invitational rhetoric. Invitational rhetoric differs from a traditional view of persuasive rhetoric that “attempts to win over an opponent, or to advocate the correctness of a single position in a very complex issue” (Bone et al., 2008). Instead, invitational rhetoric proposes a model of reaching consensus through dialogue. The goal is to create a climate in which growth and change can occur but isn’t required for one person to “win” an argument over another. Each person in a communication situation is acknowledged to have a standpoint that is valid but can still be influenced through the offering of alternative perspectives and the invitation to engage with and discuss these standpoints (Ryan & Natalle, 2001). Safety, value, and freedom are three important parts of invitational rhetoric. Safety involves a feeling of security in which audience members and speakers feel like their ideas and contributions will not be denigrated. Value refers to the notion that each person in a communication encounter is worthy of recognition and that people are willing to step outside their own perspectives to better understand others. Last, freedom is present in communication when communicators do not limit the thinking or decisions of others, allowing all participants to speak up (Bone et al., 2008).

Invitational rhetoric doesn’t claim that all persuasive rhetoric is violent. Instead, it acknowledges that some persuasion is violent and that the connection between persuasion and violence is worth exploring. Invitational rhetoric has the potential to contribute to the civility of communication in our society. When we are civil, we are capable of engaging with and appreciating different perspectives while still understanding our own. People aren’t attacked or reviled because their views diverge from ours. Rather than reducing the world to “us against them, black or white, and right or wrong,” invitational rhetoric encourages us to acknowledge human perspectives in all their complexity (Bone et al., 2008).

• What is your reaction to the claim that persuasion includes Western and masculine biases?
• What are some strengths and weaknesses of the proposed alternatives to traditional persuasion?
• In what situations might an invitational approach to persuasion be useful? In what situations might you want to rely on traditional models of persuasion?

Organizing a Persuasive Speech

We have already discussed several patterns for organizing your speech, but some organization strategies are specific to persuasive speaking. Some persuasive speech topics lend themselves to a topical organization pattern, which breaks the larger topic up into logical divisions. Earlier, in Chapter 9 “Preparing a Speech” , we discussed recency and primacy, and in this chapter we discussed adapting a persuasive speech based on the audience’s orientation toward the proposition. These concepts can be connected when organizing a persuasive speech topically. Primacy means putting your strongest information first and is based on the idea that audience members put more weight on what they hear first. This strategy can be especially useful when addressing an audience that disagrees with your proposition, as you can try to win them over early. Recency means putting your strongest information last to leave a powerful impression. This can be useful when you are building to a climax in your speech, specifically if you include a call to action.

Putting your strongest argument last can help motivate an audience to action.

Celestine Chua – The Change – CC BY 2.0.

The problem-solution pattern is an organizational pattern that advocates for a particular approach to solve a problem. You would provide evidence to show that a problem exists and then propose a solution with additional evidence or reasoning to justify the course of action. One main point addressing the problem and one main point addressing the solution may be sufficient, but you are not limited to two. You could add a main point between the problem and solution that outlines other solutions that have failed. You can also combine the problem-solution pattern with the cause-effect pattern or expand the speech to fit with Monroe’s Motivated Sequence.

As was mentioned in Chapter 9 “Preparing a Speech” , the cause-effect pattern can be used for informative speaking when the relationship between the cause and effect is not contested. The pattern is more fitting for persuasive speeches when the relationship between the cause and effect is controversial or unclear. There are several ways to use causes and effects to structure a speech. You could have a two-point speech that argues from cause to effect or from effect to cause. You could also have more than one cause that lead to the same effect or a single cause that leads to multiple effects. The following are some examples of thesis statements that correspond to various organizational patterns. As you can see, the same general topic area, prison overcrowding, is used for each example. This illustrates the importance of considering your organizational options early in the speech-making process, since the pattern you choose will influence your researching and writing.

Persuasive Speech Thesis Statements by Organizational Pattern

• Problem-solution. Prison overcrowding is a serious problem that we can solve by finding alternative rehabilitation for nonviolent offenders.
• Problem–failed solution–proposed solution. Prison overcrowding is a serious problem that shouldn’t be solved by building more prisons; instead, we should support alternative rehabilitation for nonviolent offenders.
• Cause-effect. Prisons are overcrowded with nonviolent offenders, which leads to lesser sentences for violent criminals.
• Cause-cause-effect. State budgets are being slashed and prisons are overcrowded with nonviolent offenders, which leads to lesser sentences for violent criminals.
• Cause-effect-effect. Prisons are overcrowded with nonviolent offenders, which leads to increased behavioral problems among inmates and lesser sentences for violent criminals.
• Cause-effect-solution. Prisons are overcrowded with nonviolent offenders, which leads to lesser sentences for violent criminals; therefore we need to find alternative rehabilitation for nonviolent offenders.

Monroe’s Motivated Sequence is an organizational pattern designed for persuasive speaking that appeals to audience members’ needs and motivates them to action. If your persuasive speaking goals include a call to action, you may want to consider this organizational pattern. We already learned about the five steps of Monroe’s Motivated Sequence in Chapter 9 “Preparing a Speech” , but we will review them here with an example:

• Hook the audience by making the topic relevant to them.
• Imagine living a full life, retiring, and slipping into your golden years. As you get older you become more dependent on others and move into an assisted-living facility. Although you think life will be easier, things get worse as you experience abuse and mistreatment from the staff. You report the abuse to a nurse and wait, but nothing happens and the abuse continues. Elder abuse is a common occurrence, and unlike child abuse, there are no laws in our state that mandate complaints of elder abuse be reported or investigated.
• Cite evidence to support the fact that the issue needs to be addressed.
• According to the American Psychological Association, one to two million elderly US Americans have been abused by their caretakers. In our state, those in the medical, psychiatric, and social work field are required to report suspicion of child abuse but are not mandated to report suspicions of elder abuse.
• Offer a solution and persuade the audience that it is feasible and well thought out.
• There should be a federal law mandating that suspicion of elder abuse be reported and that all claims of elder abuse be investigated.
• Take the audience beyond your solution and help them visualize the positive results of implementing it or the negative consequences of not.
• Elderly people should not have to live in fear during their golden years. A mandatory reporting law for elderly abuse will help ensure that the voices of our elderly loved ones will be heard.
• Call your audience to action by giving them concrete steps to follow to engage in a particular action or to change a thought or behavior.
• I urge you to take action in two ways. First, raise awareness about this issue by talking to your own friends and family. Second, contact your representatives at the state and national level to let them know that elder abuse should be taken seriously and given the same level of importance as other forms of abuse. I brought cards with the contact information for our state and national representatives for this area. Please take one at the end of my speech. A short e-mail or phone call can help end the silence surrounding elder abuse.

Key Takeaways

• Arguments are formed by making claims that are supported by evidence. The underlying justification that connects the claim and evidence is the warrant. Arguments can have strong or weak warrants, which will make them more or less persuasive.
• Good persuasive speech topics are current, controversial (but not inflammatory), and important to the speaker and society.
• When audience members agree with the proposal, focus on intensifying their agreement and moving them to action.
• When audience members are neutral in regards to the proposition, provide background information to better inform them about the issue and present information that demonstrates the relevance of the topic to the audience.
• When audience members disagree with the proposal, focus on establishing your credibility, build common ground with the audience, and incorporate counterarguments and refute them.
• Propositions of fact focus on establishing that something “is or isn’t” or is “true or false.”
• Propositions of value focus on persuading an audience that something is “good or bad,” “right or wrong,” or “desirable or undesirable.”
• Propositions of policy advocate that something “should or shouldn’t” be done.
• Persuasive speeches can be organized using the following patterns: problem-solution, cause-effect, cause-effect-solution, or Monroe’s Motivated Sequence.
• Getting integrated: Give an example of persuasive messages that you might need to create in each of the following contexts: academic, professional, personal, and civic. Then do the same thing for persuasive messages you may receive.
• To help ensure that your persuasive speech topic is persuasive and not informative, identify the claims, evidence, and warrants you may use in your argument. In addition, write a thesis statement that refutes your topic idea and identify evidence and warrants that could support that counterargument.
• Determine if your speech is primarily a proposition of fact, value, or policy. How can you tell? Identify an organizational pattern that you think will work well for your speech topic, draft one sentence for each of your main points, and arrange them according to the pattern you chose.

Bone, J. E., Cindy L. Griffin, and T. M. Linda Scholz, “Beyond Traditional Conceptualizations of Rhetoric: Invitational Rhetoric and a Move toward Civility,” Western Journal of Communication 72 (2008): 436.

Gearhart, S. M., “The Womanization of Rhetoric,” Women’s Studies International Quarterly 2 (1979): 195–201.

Ryan, K. J., and Elizabeth J. Natalle, “Fusing Horizons: Standpoint Hermenutics and Invitational Rhetoric,” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 31 (2001): 69–90.

Communication in the Real World Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

10 Developing Strong Arguments

Josh miller, university of wisconsin-milwaukee, learning objectives.

• Understand the principles of argumentation.
• Identify the parts of an argument.
• Understand the different types of arguments, and how to make an effective argument.
• Explain the techniques for creating and the benefits of having counter arguments.

When you think of the word argument, you might also think of intense shouting matches where one person attempts to yell louder than the other person. You might imagine someone’s feelings getting hurt or relationships falling apart. Or, perhaps a scene emerges in your mind where one friend decides to stop speaking with another friend after an altercation. You might even think of physical violence. In general, people tend to have a negative impression about arguing, thinking that arguments are destructive and harmful. We want to avoid arguments. This chapter, however, takes a different approach to argument. As you will learn in this chapter, effective public speeches develop around arguments, and arguments do not need to be considered harmful things to be avoided. Instead, someone engaged in an argument gives logical reasons to other people—reasons that might enable those people to change their own minds about a particular topic or issue.

This chapter will first equip you with some basic principles for understanding the importance of arguments in public speaking. Based on those principles, you will learn why speeches must have arguments and how to determine the success of an argument. Then, you will learn about the basic structure of an argument, so you have the tools to develop compelling arguments. The chapter will also discuss several types of arguments that you can make, and it will warn you several types of argumentative strategies that you will want to avoid. You will also learn about the significance of knowing what other people might think about your topic and why it is important to address other people’s potential concerns with your topic in your speech itself.

Principles of Argumentation

Before we examine the structure of an argument, it might be helpful to first cover some essential principles of argumentation. These principles help us to be better equipped to answer the following questions: why do we argue? What is argumentation and what is an argument? How do I know that I have made a successful argument? There are four principles in total: (1) argumentation solves problems, (2) argumentation involves uncertainty, (3) arguments are a process and a product, and (4) success is determined by the audience.

Principle #1: Argumentation as Solutions to Problems

Why do we make arguments and why do we engage in argumentation? At the most basic level, we engage in arguments to solve problems. In your local community, you might believe that the roads are littered with too many potholes, so you decide to convince your neighbors and your local city council to raise taxes to fix all of those potholes. To convince your neighbors and city council members to make the change, you need to engage in argumentation. In other words, you need to give your audience, members of your local city council and neighbors, good reasons as to why they should make a change and taxes should be increased. What distinguishes argumentation from other ways to solve problems is that arguers will use evidence and logical reasoning to convince others that there is a problem and that they know the best way to fix the problem. [i] In public speaking, argumentation is not a zero-sum game where there is a clear winner and loser because the goal of argumentation is connection and problem-solving. In short, arguments are used to inspire action and solutions to fix problems.

Principle #2: Argumentation involves Uncertainty

Arguments are necessary when there is uncertainty about what people can do or should do at some point in the future. Arguments work to reduce that uncertainty. When we face a problem in our daily lives, in our communities, or as a nation, we have many different options about what we can do. Some might not even recognize or believe that a problem is occurring and thus believe that we do not need to do anything. Some people might believe that one possible solution is better than the other solutions, and some might disagree with that assessment. Moreover, we generally need to decide how to respond to the problem with limited information, and we can never be certain what the proper course of action entails. If the solution were obvious, we would not need to make arguments to convince others of the best course of action. When we face problems, we can try to agree on the best course of action by giving each other reasons why we should prefer one action over another. Because of the uncertainty inherent in argumentation, arguments require people to take “inferential leaps” or leaps of faith. People make these leaps of faith because they believe that a strong rationale exists for believing in one point of view over another. [ii]

Principle #3: Arguments as Products/Process

We can understand arguments as being both a product and a process. To view an argument as a product is to understand that an argument is something that is made and has a structure. As a public speaker, you will make an argument to convince someone to agree with your point of view. You will give evidence and use that evidence to make an argument about why your point of view is correct. However, arguments are something that you will also have with other people. Arguments do not occur in a vacuum. So, to view argument as a process means to understand that arguments happen in interactions with others. Through that process, you might tell your audience why you believe your evidence justifies a particular position over another, but your audience members might also tell you why they think their point of view is superior to others. Throughout that interaction and exchange of ideas and evidence, hopefully, you and your fellow arguers will arrive and agree upon the best course of action.

In order for the process of argumentation to work, both you and your audience members have to be open to persuasion. This openness is known as the principle of reciprocity . True argumentation can only occur if both you and your audience are open to being persuaded and willing to admit that you may be wrong. [iii] You and your audience members have to be willing to examine the evidence and be willing to compromise. That is, engagement with others is necessary for productive argumentation. [iv] Otherwise, even though you might be exchanging points of view and evidence supporting those points of view, both you and your audience members will not be able to arrive at a collective course of action that will solve the problems you face. In short, arguments are things that we make (produce), but arguments are also things that we do with others (process).

The principle of reciprocity is when both you and your audience members are open to persuasion.

Principle #4: Success is Determine by Your Audience

Being correct is not the same thing as having a strong or successful argument. Success is based on earning agreement of your audience. When we argue, it is because we want others to share our point of view and act with us to solve a problem. Ultimately, it is up to our audience to decide if they want to agree with our point of view and act collectively with us. So, even if we are confident that we are correct in what we believe, we cannot consider our arguments to be successful until we convince others to agree with our point of view. The process of earning agreement from your audience can be long and difficult. However, merely repeating what you believe to be correct will not foster a successful argument. It is not until you realize that your audience determines whether or not your argument is correct that you can begin to work to earn that agreement. As such, creating a successful argument often takes time, effort, research, and a willingness to engage with ideas and beliefs with which you disagree.

Now that we have covered some of the basic principles of argumentation, let us examine the parts of an argument. Knowing the parts of every argument will help you recognize whether or not you are crafting an effective argument for your speech.

The Parts of an Argument

A well-structured argument contains at least three parts: the claim, the data, and the reasoning. The claim is the initial statement with which you would like your audience to agree. The data is the supporting material and evidence that you present to your audience that you believe shows that your claim is accurate. The reasoning is the logical connection between your data and claim. In other words, the reasoning shows your audience why your data supports your claim. [i] For example, if you are attempting to convince your friend to go eat lunch with you at a local burger place, you might say “we should go to that burger place for lunch today.” You want your friend to agree with that statement, and it is thus your claim. Your friend might ask “why?” And, you might respond by stating “it has the best fries.” This statement is your data because it is the supporting material that you provided to your friend to prove that your claim (“we should go to the burger place”) is correct. Your reasoning is the logical connection between your claim and the data. In this case, your reasoning might be that “restaurants that have the best fries are the best places to eat.” This statement connects your data (that the burger place has the best fries) to your claim (that you should eat at the burger place). Thus, your complete argument: “Places that have the best fries are the best places to eat lunch. So, we should eat at the burger place, because they have the best fries.” This statement includes your claim, data, and reasoning.

In everyday conversation, speakers do not always explicitly state the reasoning of the argument. When you talk to your friends about where to eat lunch, you might only say “we should eat at the burger place, because they have great fries.” If you ever said this statement, you would have only explicitly stated the claim and data. The reasoning is implied, and you would have assumed that your friends would understand the logical connection between having good fries and going to a place to eat. Based on this example, we might infer that not everyone will explicitly state their reasoning. However, for your argument to be effective, your audience needs to understand and agree with the logical connection between your claim and data. As such, if you do not state the reasoning explicitly, you must be confident that the logical connection is obvious enough that your audience will understand what it is. To be on the safe side, you should be as explicit as possible about how your data supports your claim in your speech, especially if your argument is complex or new to your audience. Remember that without a clear connection between your data and claim your argument will fall flat.

The claim is the intial statement with which you would like your audience to agree.

The data is the supporting material and evidence that you present to your audience that you believe shows that your claim is accurate.

The reasoning is the logical connection between your data and claim.

The basic structure of an argument includes a claim, data, and reasoning. To know how to develop as many diverse arguments as possible, it is helpful to know about the many different ways the reasoning process works in an argument. Let’s examine the different types of argument.

Try It: “Because” Test

Strong data is critical to developing strong arguments. To ensure that you include evidence in every argument, use the “because” test. The word because usually signals that a clause in your sentence will contain data supporting the other clause in the sentence. As such, one way to identify your claim and data is to add the word “because.” Examine the topic sentence of each paragraph (or main point) of your speech. If those sentences do not contain the word “because,” try to rewrite them to include the word “because.” If you cannot, then it is likely that your sentence needs data to support your claim and be a complete argument. Think of the burger place example once again. In this hypothetical, if your sentence was only “we should go to the burger place,” you will notice that you cannot rewrite this sentence to include the word “because.” As such, this sentence is only the claim. However, if your statement was “The burger place has great fries. We should go to it.” You can rewrite that statement as “we should go to the burger place because it has great fries.” This statement includes both the claim (“we should go to the burger place”) and data (“it has great fries”); the “because” in the sentence signals a connection between the claim and data.

Types of Arguments

Understanding different reasoning patterns can help you construct better arguments.  We will examine six ways you might reason as you develop and articulate an argument: (1) arguments by induction, (2) arguments from deduction, (3) arguments of cause, (4) arguments by analogy, (5) arguments by sign, and (6) arguments from authority.

Arguments from Induction

When arguing by induction , speakers take specific instances of an occurrence and generalize to a general principle based on their observation of those specific instances. [i] This process of going from specific instances and information to generalizing is also called developing an argument from example. During election seasons, pollsters use reasoning by example to make arguments about which candidate the general population prefers or wants to vote for at a given time. Pollsters ask a sample number of people to determine what they are thinking about the election. Based on the results from that sample, pollsters generalize and draw conclusions about what the general population thinks about the election and the candidates.

When developing an argument from example, your data is a specific instance of a larger phenomenon. You might use your personal experience to make your generalization. For example, if you are giving a speech about the need for public libraries, you can use your personal experience of using the public library to use the internet, check out a book, or have a quiet place to work. Based on your personal experience (your data) of needing to use the library, you generalize (your reasoning) to make the argument that libraries are an essential facet of your community (your claim). Other types of data that might be relevant to an argument from example include testimonies of other and statistics. For instance, if you want to argue that the economy of your state is doing poorly, you might find statistics that three of the largest cities in the state have growing unemployment and have a shrinking economy. Based on those three statistics (your data), you generalize (your reasoning) to conclude that the economy in the entire state is likely weaker than it should be (your claim).

If you decide to use inductive reasoning in your speech, you should ask yourself the following questions: (1) Do I have enough examples to support the generalization? (2) Will my audience members find my examples typical and representative? [ii] Your argument from example may not be persuasive without enough examples to support your conclusion. For instance, if you are giving a speech about funding for libraries and you tell your audience that you use the libraries, your audience will not accept your generalization that the library is important because many people use it. Instead, you could provide your audience with a statistic stating the total number of people that use the libraries to generalize that many people use them. Arguments from example also fail when the examples are outliers or isolated instances. You may not like chocolate cake, but that does not mean that we can then conclude that most people dislike chocolate cake.

Arguments from Deduction

Whereas reasoning by example involves moving from specific instances to a general principle, when using deductive reasoning , speakers take a general principle and apply that principle to a specific case. For example, if you have evidence proving that in general students who attend a preschool do better in their K-12 education than students who do not, you might make an argument that your child should attend preschool so they can do better in their K-12 education. In this example, your claim would be that “my child should attend preschool.” Your data is the study you found saying, attending preschool correlates with more success in K-12 education. The reasoning that connects the data and claim is the belief that what is generally true for other children will be true for your child. When you make an argument that starts with a general principle and then apply that principle to a specific example, you are reasoning by deduction.

Data that supports an argument from deduction can include both facts and values derived from expert testimony, statistics, and revered documents. For example, when Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech, he cited two revered documents: the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. On that hot summer’s day in 1963, King exclaimed:

When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the “unalienable Rights” of “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note, insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked “insufficient funds.” [iii]

The argument that King develops in this passage is one based on deduction. King starts with the data that the Declaration of Independence proclaims that all people are created equal. King then applies the general value principle established by the Declaration of Independence to the issue of racial segregation. When he does that, he can conclude that all races should be treated equally under the law and granted the guarantee of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Because the Declaration of Independence generally concludes that all people are created equal (data), King argues that in the specific instance (reasoning) of racial segregation that the law should treat all races equally (claim).

When developing an argument from deduction, you need to be confident that the general principle on which you base your argument is accurate and that your audience will believe that it is accurate. If you do not believe that your audience will agree with the general principle, then you would want to include additional evidence justifying that the general principle is accurate before you apply that general principle to a specific situation.

Arguments of Cause

Arguments based on causal reasoning attempt to establish a cause and effect relationship between two items. So, based on an assumption about a relationship between the two items, your argument predicts that something will occur based on the data that you have. That is, you believe that one of the items influences the other items in some way. For instance, if a friend noticed you studying three hours a day for a whole week, that friend might make the following prediction: “you are going to do well on your exam because you have been putting in so many hours of studying.” In this example, your friend’s claim is that you will do well on the exam. The data is your friend’s observation of all of the studying that you have been doing. The reasoning in this argument is that a cause and effect relationship exists between studying and doing well on an exam. When speakers and audiences believe that one thing causes the other thing, they assume that the observation of one of the things allows us to predict that the other thing will occur.

Another example of reasoning by cause would be the argument that “you should stop smoking, so you do not develop lung disease.” In this argument, the claim would be “you should stop smoking.” The speaker making this argument would be using causal reasoning because the argument assumes that a causal relationship between smoking and lung disease exists. The argument assumes that smoking does cause lung disease. To strengthen arguments by cause, you should clearly articulate evidence that supports the cause and effect relationship between the two items. In the instance of the smoking example, citing evidence that establishes the connection between smoking and lung cancer would make the causal argument stronger. Moreover, strong arguments by cause usually include an explanation about how one item influences the other item. For instance, in the example about smoking, saying that smoking damages lung cells which increases the likelihood of lung disease explains to the audience how smoking and lung disease are connected.

Causal arguments fail when they are based on correlation rather than causation. Correlation means that two things tend to happen at the same time—they have a connection. However, in a correlation one thing does not cause the other thing. For example, we may notice that college debt is increasing in the United States, and we may also notice that over the same period of time smoking has been decreasing in the United States. However, we cannot conclude that if more people smoked cigarettes, college debt would decrease. When two things happen at the same time, it does not prove that one causes the other.

Arguments by Analogy

Arguments by analogy assume that if two items are alike in some respects, then they will be alike in other respects. As such, reasoning by analogy connects evidence to the claim by comparing to items. [iv] Take the following argument for example: “Sweden’s health care system dramatically reduced health care costs in five years. Thus, the United States should follow Sweden’s lead and adopt a similar healthcare system.” In this example, the claim is that the United States should adopt a health care system that is similar to Sweden’s. The data is a report that Sweden’s health care costs were reduced in five years. The reasoning connects the claim and data together. In this case, the reasoning is that because the United States and Sweden are comparable countries, what worked in Sweden should work in the United States. This type of reasoning relies on the belief that the two items (in this example, Sweden and the United States) are actually comparable in ways that are relevant to the argument. If members of the audience think that one cannot make a comparison between the two countries, then the reasoning process (and the argument) fails.

Remember that when you reason by analogy, the two objects that you are comparing need to be similar and your audience needs to understand their similarities. The similarities also need to be relevant to your argument. If the two objects that you are comparing seem dissimilar, then it will be more difficult for you to convince your audience to take the “leap of faith” and accept your claim.

Arguments by Sign

When a speaker makes an argument that uses reasoning by sign , the speaker assumes that the observation of one item shows that another item is occurring. Reasoning by sign then allows us to infer the presence of something, even if that thing cannot be physically observed. One of the most common arguments based on sign is the following: “I see smoke. There must be a fire.” Even though the speaker does not see fire, the speaker reasons that the presence of smoke must mean that there is a fire. If we were to break that argument into its parts, we would say the claim is that there is fire. The data is the physical observation of smoke. The reasoning process would be that “smoke is a sign of fire.”

Reasoning by sign is distinct from reasoning by cause because reasoning by sign does not attempt to show a causal relationship between the two things. That is, when you are reasoning by sign, you are not saying that “smoke causes fire” but that “from our observation of smoke, we can assume the presence of fire.” If we were to use reasoning by cause, we might state that: “because fire causes smoke, if I start a fire, there will also be smoke.” In the example of reasoning by cause, we infer something will happen based on the occurrence of something else. In the example of reasoning by sign, we infer something is happening based on our observation of something else.

When reasoning by sign, you want to be careful to take into account alternative explanations of what might be happening. For example, if you walk outside in the morning and see a large puddle of water, you might assume that it recently rained. This assumption would be reasoning by sign because you assume that your observation of the puddle enables you to infer that rain occurred. However, other explanations might exist for why there is a large pool of water. For example, a fire hydrant might be broke nearby that is gushing water everywhere, or someone might have left on their garden hose. So, when you reason by sign, you need to take other possibilities into account and determine if your explanation is the best possible explanation for what occurred. [v]

Arguments from Authority

An argument from authority uses the expertise of someone as data to justify a claim as correct. This type of argument is one of the reasons it is important to cite qualified sources in your speech. The expertise of your sources justifies the arguments that you are making. Take the following argument: “Climate change is a real phenomenon because a vast majority of scientists indicate that it is real. In fact, in a peer-reviewed study, Doctor John Cook and his research team compiled scientific studies about climate change and found over 90% of scientists agree that the phenomenon is real.” [vi] In this argument, the claim is that climate change is real. The data is a study conducted by experts in the field stating that scientific consensus exists around the issue of climate change. The reasoning that connects the claim with the data is that what experts in their field indicate as true is likely to be true. When you reason by authority, you can either quote the authority figure or summarize the authority figure’s arguments. Regardless, you must also tell your audience who the authority figure is and why they are qualified to speak about the topic of your speech.

When developing an argument from authority, remember the following: first, you need to make sure that the person you are citing is an expert in the topic of your speech. Someone might have a doctorate in literature, but that does not mean that their testimony on a scientific process is authoritative. Conversely, someone who has a doctorate in chemistry might not have the most authoritative voice when it comes to a speech involving books that have historically been banned from public schools. Second, the strongest arguments from authority generally do not rely on only one person’s authority. Instead, they rely on the testimony of multiple sources all of which are qualified to speak on the matter of your speech. For example, if you want to make a claim about the effect of increased carbon dioxide emission on plant life, a stronger argument would cite multiple independent qualified sources rather than just one source. Lastly, always remember to cite your sources out loud in your speech. Because your argument relies on the credibility of the people you are citing, you need to make sure you tell your audience your sources’ qualifications.

Arguments and Multiple Types of Reasoning

Not every member of your audience will be persuaded by the same argument. Some people connect better with a clear example. Some people are more trusting of authority figures than others. Because of this, you will want to include several types of arguments in your speech. For example, if you wanted to convince your neighbors to increase taxes to reduce potholes, you might want to both include personal testimonies of people who say that they damaged their cars (reasoning by example) and evidence from car mechanics that detail how potholes can damage cars (reasoning by authority). When you include a few types of reasoning in your speech, the chance that at least one of your arguments will convince your audience of your thesis will increase. To strengthen your argument, you might use multiple pieces of evidence and reason in different ways to justify the same claim.

Additionally, you might cite evidence to support the reasoning process of an argument in your speech. Recall the example above about convincing someone to quit smoking. If you said, “you should quit smoking because you do not want to get cancer,” you would be reasoning by cause. Your claim is the person should quit smoking. The data is that it is bad to get cancer. The argument assumes a causal relationship between smoking and cancer. Thus, the argument reasons by cause. Now, imagine that you made the following argument: “you should quit smoking because you do not want to get cancer. According to a report released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), smoking leads to lung cancer.” [vii] In this statement, you have provided evidence supporting the reasoning of your argument. Think of the second sentence “according to a report released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), smoking leads to lung cancer” as a new argument. In this argument, the claim is that smoking leads to lung cancer which is the reasoning from the first sentence of the argument. The data for the second sentence is the CDC’s report. The reasoning that connects the claim and data is reasoning by authority because the argument assumes that what experts state as true is likely to be true. So, when you are constructing your arguments for your speech, if you ever think that the reasoning of your argument is unclear or might not convince others, you should find additional evidence to support the logical connection between your claim and data.

Inductive reasoning is when a speaker takes specific instances of occurrence and generalizes to a general principle based on their observation of those specific instances.

Deductive reasoning is when speakers take a general principle and apply that principle to a specific case.

Arguments based on causal reasoning attempt to establish a cause and effect relationship between two items.

Arguments by analogy assume that if two items are alike in some respects, then they will be alike in other respects.

When reasoning by sign , the speaker assumes that the observation of one item shows that another item is occurring.

An argument that reasons from authority uses the expertise of someone as data to justify a claim as correct.

Counter Arguments

Effective speakers recognize that their audience members’ points of view often differ from their own. As a speaker, you will, of course, attempt to prove that your point of view is the one that your audience should adopt. However, because audience members have their own points of view and beliefs about many issues, it is vital for you to brainstorm what those other beliefs and views about your topic might be and how you might address those beliefs in your speech. It might be easy to ignore divergent points of view, but doing so does a disservice to both your speech and your audience. As a speaker, you need to take other points of view into account as you develop your speech.

To ensure that you are considering other points of view, your speech should address potential counter arguments. Counter arguments are positions with which your audience might hold that contradict or oppose your arguments. [i] For example, if you were to give a speech in which you argue that taxes should be increased to maintain public libraries in your hometown, someone else might think “why would we do that? No one uses libraries anymore.” The belief that no one uses libraries anymore may challenge the main argument of your speech. Thus, it is a counter-argument to your speech.

It is important for you to remember that at least one counter argument will exist whenever you give a speech. If there are no counter arguments and everyone in the audience already agrees with your thesis, you would have no reason to deliver the speech. The best speakers, knowing there are likely to be counter arguments present whenever they speak, anticipate and respond to potential beliefs or positions that run contrary to their thesis. For instance, if you were delivering the speech mentioned above about increasing funding for libraries, you would want to tailor your speech to highlight why people might use libraries and provide data to support your claim. You might find reports that show people use libraries for internet access if they do not have internet at home, or you might also find newspaper articles that discuss summer reading program that libraries hold for children. You can then incorporate those pieces of evidence into your speech to address the counter-argument that people do not use libraries anymore. For instance, you might say something like this: “Some of you might think that not enough people use our public libraries to justify the increased expenditures, but a recent Pew Research Institute poll found that people still frequently use public libraries to check out books, take classes about how to use new technology, and use the internet to find jobs.” [ii] If you had delivered this statement, you would have referenced an opposing viewpoint (“not enough people use our public libraries to justify increased expenditures”), showing your audience that you are aware of potential positions that contradict your own. You also would have responded to the opposing position with evidence that shows your audience members why they do not need to be concerned about lack of library use.

You can also address counter arguments is by establishing a value hierarchy. A value hierarchy prioritizes certain values and beliefs over others while still affirming all of those values and beliefs. For example, imagine that you are involved in a debate with another person about whether or not the United States should adopt a counter-terrorism measure and increase surveillance on its citizens. One side might argue, “No, we should not increase surveillance because that undermines our freedom and right to privacy.” The other side might argue, “Yes, we should increase surveillance because that will make us safer from terror attacks.” Both sides have constructed their argument based on the need for preserving a particular value. One side wants to preserve freedom, and the other side wants to preserve safety. Both positions can establish a value hierarchy to respond to the other side’s argument. For example, the person who opposes the counter-terrorism measure might say, “Although our safety is important, we must remember that we are fighting to protect the principles and rights on which our country was founded, including the right to privacy. Give me liberty or give me death.” In this statement, the speaker values the opposing side’s safety concerns but also indicates that the right to privacy is more important than safety. So, although the speaker agrees that safety is important, the speaker concludes that the counter-terror measure should not be adopted based on another more important value. Yet, the speaker who supports the counter-terror measure might also attempt to establish a value hierarchy. That speaker might say, “You are correct that privacy is important. However, to truly enjoy the benefits of living in a free society, we must all feel that we are safe. Without a feeling of security, we will never benefit from the freedoms we have.” This speaker establishes a value hierarchy by suggesting the safety is necessary for freedom, which takes counter-argument of needing to preserve freedom into account and addresses it. Therefore, when you are constructing your speech, one way you can address counter-arguments is by considering related values and developing a value hierarchy.

In general, acknowledging counter arguments and responding to them makes you appear more credible to your audience members than if you simply ignored counter-argument. The first reason that this is the case is that addressing counter arguments makes you appear more knowledgeable about the topic and less biased. Explaining potential reasons that someone might disagree with your speech shows your audience that you did your research and tried to understand all sides of the issue as you developed your speech. Your knowledge enhances your credibility on a particular topic. Then, when you address the various sides of the issue, you show your audience that you took the time to consider other viewpoints and why your position is still the correct one. What this does is show your audience that you care about finding the correct solution to a problem, making you seem more trustworthy.

The second reason that you should address counter arguments is that audience members who agree with the counter argument will view you with skepticism if you fail to address their concerns. For example, if you attempt to get a vegetarian or someone who wants to eat healthy to join you for lunch at your local burger place, they are unlikely to be convinced by your argument that the burger place has really juicy burgers. The vegetarian would probably think “but I don’t eat meat. What is in it for me?” And, the person trying to eat healthily might think, “but don’t those have a thousand calories?” Neither one of these people would be convinced by your argument because you have not addressed the counter-arguments. Just stating the burger place has great burgers may make these members of your audience feel that you did not care about their beliefs and values or, in another sense, whether or not you actually convinced them to go to the burger place. Without taking into account your audience’s beliefs, it can be difficult for you to establish a connection with your audience. Remember, a connection is necessary for you to persuade your audience to accept your point of view.

Counter arguments are positions with which your audience might hold that contradict or oppose your arguments.

A value hierarchy holds certain values and beliefs over others while still affirming all of those values and beliefs.

Logical Fallacies: Weaknesses in Reasoning

Many potential pitfalls exist when you are creating arguments. These pitfalls, known as logical fallacies, are weaknesses in reasoning. As you read earlier in the chapter, every argument contains a claim, data, and reasoning that logically connects your data to your claim. In other words, when you craft an argument, a clear reason as to why your data supports and justifies your claim must exist. Without that clear connection, your argument will not make sense. Saying, for example, it will rain today because my finger itches does not make sense because there is not a clear connection between an itchy finger and rain. Logical fallacies are arguments in which there is not a clear connection between the claim and evidence, or there appears to be a connection between the two, but that connection is flawed. In other words, logical fallacies are weakness or flaws in the logic and reasoning of particular arguments.

Logical fallacies are fairly common. They can occur in political speeches, in arguments with friends and parents, commercials, and advertisements. An important part of being a critical listener is being able to notice the weaknesses in arguments. And, an important part of being an effective speaker is being able to avoid logical fallacies and develop the strongest arguments possible. As such, learning to identify logical fallacies will enhance your critical listening skills as well as your ability to be an effective speaker.

The Strawperson Fallacy

The strawperson fallacy exaggerates or misrepresents someone else’s argument to make that argument easier to refute. Recall the example from earlier in the chapter about giving a speech where you argued that taxes should be increased in order to pay for fixing potholes. Now, imagine that someone said, “all tax and spend liberals want is to take all your money and increase the size of government.” This statement is an example of the strawperson fallacy because your argument is not that the government should take all of the local townsfolk’s money. This person is exaggerating your argument to make it sound ridiculous and weaker than it is. The strawperson fallacy is a dishonest argumentative strategy because it fails to tell the audience the actual argument that needs to be refuted. It might be easier to “beat” a position if you misrepresent it, but doing so is unethical. Audience members who are familiar with the actual argument that you are refuting will know that you are exaggerating the argument and will view you with skepticism.

False Cause

The false cause fallacy assumes that if an actual or perceived relationship exists between two things, then one must be the cause of the other. That is, this fallacy assumes that correlation is causation. Thus, the false cause fallacy is committed when an argument is based on the mistaken belief that a causal relationship exists between two variables when no support for that relationship exists. When the false cause fallacy occurs in a speech, it is likely that causal relationship between the two variables has not been established or cannot be established. A Buzzfeed article posted in 2013 by Ky Harlin exhibits several interesting correlations and why you should not assume that one variable causes another based on a simple correlation. For example, Harlin’s article shows that there is a correlation between the amount of ice cream sold in a month and the number of murders that occur in a month. An argument using a false cause fallacy may claim that buying ice cream causes murder. Another example in Harlin’s article is a correlation exists between M. Night Shyamalan’s movie score on Rotten Tomatoes and total newspaper ad sales. [i] Assuming that people failing to buy newspaper ads makes M. Night Shyamalan worse at making movies would be a false cause fallacy. For each of these examples, other explanations likely exist for changes to each variable. In the case of ice cream and murder, perhaps the reason that both ice cream buying and murder increases in the summer is due to the weather or another variable entirely.

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

Meaning “after this, therefore because of this,” post hoc ergo propter hoc is a subset of the false cause fallacy. This fallacy assumes that if Event A happened before Event B, then Event A was the cause of Event B. If you ever hear people make the argument that their itchy fingers mean it is about to rain, they are likely committing this fallacy. Imagine that your finger started itching and then ten minutes later it started to rain. If you conclude that your itchy finger made it rain, then you would be assuming that an event happened first and thus caused the second event to occur. Logically, there is not a connection between the two events unless you are able to prove that connection to your audience. In other words, pointing out that two things happened in chronological order is not proof that one is connected to the other. Your audience will likely see the two things as independent of each other unless you can provide an explanation of why they are connected.

Red Herring

The red herring fallacy occurs when someone introduces irrelevant information or topics into a discussion in order to distract from the topic or debate at hand. This action is an attempt to “win” a debate by starting a discussion of another topic or by distracting those you are engaged with in an argument. For example, if you were at a local city council meeting where the topic of discussion was the road quality and potholes, someone giving a speech about the prevalence of local corruption in politics would probably distract people’s attention from the question about how to best fix the roads in the city. Red Herring is a fallacy because changing the discussion to another topic does not prove that you are correct about the previous topic. Asking yourself “does the claim that I am making clearly connect to the issue I am discussing?” will help you avoid making the red herring fallacy. [ii]

Meaning “to the person,” this logical fallacy is when someone attacks their opponent and does not respond to the opponent’s argument. Ad hominem is an attack on a person’s character, personality, or traits. For example, if you are trying to convince someone that college campuses should be tuition-free and that person responds by saying “you are stupid and have bad breath,” then that person has committed the ad hominem fallacy. This fallacy is a poor argumentative strategy because it distances the arguer from the audience. People generally avoid interacting with and listening to people who call them names or attack their character. Moreover, proving that someone else has bad character traits does not demonstrate to your audience that you are correct about a particular issue. So, instead of attempting to demean other points of view, use your speech to establish why you are correct about the topic to which you are speaking.

Either-Or Fallacy

Also called the forced dilemma fallacy, the either-or fallacy happens when someone presents two competing possibilities as the only two possibilities in a given situation. This presentation is a fallacy because it is likely that more than two possibilities exist. An example of this fallacy would be if a speaker argued for funding a new college by saying “either we fund this new college or it will close and our kids will never be able to attend college.” In that statement, the speaker only articulates two possibilities for what can happen. However, as you can probably tell, there are many other options for what could occur. Those kids could go to a different college, or funding for the new college could come from somewhere else. Using the either-or fallacy is a flawed argumentative strategy because members of your audience will recognize that other options exist. When members of your audience think of other options, you will lose credibility as a speaker because your audience will be able to tell that you did not take all other opinions and options about the issue into consideration as you developed your speech. Many issues are complex. Do not attempt to make them appear overly simplistic. Doing so does a disservice to yourself as a speaker and to your audience members.

Hasty Generalization

The hasty generalization fallacy is when a speaker reasons using examples but then jumps to a general conclusion without a sufficient number of examples. That is, the speaker uses examples to establish a general claim but uses too few examples to support that generalization. Moreover, the speaker might use examples that do not relate to the general claim that the speaker is attempting to make. Often stereotypes can arise because people reason using the hasty generalization fallacy. For instance, if someone made the argument that “one time I met a man wearing a red hat and he was really rude, therefore all men who wear red hats are rude,” that person would be using a hasty generalization to stereotype people with red hats. The hasty generalization is a weak argument strategy because members of an audience can often think of counter-examples that disprove the general claim. When making arguments based on examples, make sure that you have enough examples to demonstrate that your generalization is accurate.

The bandwagon fallacy occurs when someone assumes that something is true just because many people believe it to be true. Thus, appealing to the popularity of an idea as its primary support is the bandwagon fallacy. For example, if you wanted to convince your audience to avoid skydiving and argued that everyone knows that skydiving causes death, you have substituted actual evidence for the assertion that everyone knows you are correct. Just because people believe something is true does not mean that it is the case. Remember that a lot of people used to believe that the earth is flat and that leeches effectively cured diseases. Do not rely on the popularity of an idea to demonstrate that the idea is correct.

Logical fallacies arguments in which there is not a clear connection between the claim and evidence, or there appears to be a connection between the two, but that connection is flawed.

The strawperson fallacy exaggerates or misrepresents someone else’s argument to make that argument easier to refute.

The false cause fallacy assumes that if an actual or perceived relationship exists between two things, then one must be the cause of the other.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc , meaning “after this, therefore because of this,” is a subset of the false cause fallacy. This fallacy assumes that if Event A happened before Event B, then Event A was the cause of Event B.

The red herring fallacy occurs when someone introduces irrelevant information or topics into a discussion in order to distract from the topic or debate at hand.

Ad hominem is an attack on a person’s character, personality, or traits.

The either-or fallacy, or forced dilemma fallacy, happens when someone presents two competing possibilities as the only two possibilities in a given situation.

The hasty generalization fallacy is when a speaker reasons using examples but then jumps to a general conclusion without a sufficient number of examples.

The bandwagon fallacy occurs when someone assumes that something is true just because many people believe it to be true.

In this chapter, you learned several principles of argumentation. As you now know, arguments are about trying to solve collective problems. When we need to argue, it is because there is something needs to be changed or improved. We argue to convince people that there is a problem and that we can solve it. This mindset creates conditions where people might actually work to change and fix an issue. Moreover, arguments occur when there is uncertainty about what should happen in the future. We argue in an attempt to create more certainty by highlighting which options for the future are the best options. Finally, you learned that the success of an argument is based on whether or not it earns agreement from the audience.

This chapter also detailed the parts of the argument. Arguments contain these three parts: (1) the claim, (2) the data, and (3) the reasoning. The reasoning is the logical connection that shows why a particular piece of data supports the claim that a speaker is attempting to make. In addition, this chapter described six types of arguments that you might make in a speech: (1) arguments from examples, (2) arguments from deduction, (3) arguments of cause, (4) arguments by analogy, (5) arguments by sign, and (6) arguments from authority. It remains important to remember that your speech should develop several types of arguments in support of your thesis because certain types of arguments might be more persuasive than others. This chapter also defined and illustrated several types of weaknesses in arguments. These logical fallacies should be avoided when you develop a speech.

Whenever you need to develop an argument, other people might have different points of view on the issue. Rather than ignoring other people’s points of view, engage them and explain to your audience why they should prefer your point of view. Also, be willing to change your mind. Argumentation is not about who can yell the loudest. Instead, it is about giving your audience good reasons to believe in your point of view and engage ideas with which you may disagree. You cannot force someone to change their mind, but you can give good reasons as to why they should change their mind. That is the purpose of argumentation.

Stand up, Speak out Copyright © 2017 by Josh Miller; Marnie Lawler-Mcdonough; Megan Orcholski; Kristin Woodward; Lisa Roth; and Emily Mueller is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

My Speech Class

Public Speaking Tips & Speech Topics

613 Original Argumentative Speech Topics Ideas

Jim Peterson has over 20 years experience on speech writing. He wrote over 300 free speech topic ideas and how-to guides for any kind of public speaking and speech writing assignments at My Speech Class.

Argumentative speeches generally concern topics which are currently being debated by society , current controversial issues . These topics are often derived from political debates and issues which are commonly seen in the media. The chosen topic may be political, religious, social, or ethical in nature. The audience should be challenged to re-examine their long-held values, and will be asked to alter deeply held convictions based on new evidence or viewpoints on the issue.

Obviously, selecting a topic that is debatable is key to creating an effective speech. The topic should not be something which is generally already proven, or would require an enormous leap of faith or logic in order to convince the audience. The speaker should already possess a strong interest and have a deeply-held opinion on the subject, or else his arguments will probably not come across as believable to the audience.

Topics below are not our personal opinion, they are just samples of a topic. You can flip them to create a different topic. For example, if the topic is “Eating meat and dairy is bad for your body” and you believe the opposite, just make your topic “Eating meat and dairy is good for your body”.

Our list is updated often; huge thank you to all of you who send us topic ideas. Do you have an idea? Use “Send us your idea” form, and we will publish it. And don’t forget to take a look at our extensive list of argumentative essay topics for topics more suited to the written word.

List of Argumentative Speech Topics

Constitutional issues, environment, food and drink, international politics, relationships.

• How poor accounting methods cause businesses to lose money.

See this page for a full list of  Speech Topics for Business .

Can We Write Your Speech?

Get your audience blown away with help from a professional speechwriter. Free proofreading and copy-editing included.

• Does the government have the right to tax its citizens?
• Torture is an acceptable measure to prevent terrorism.
• Banning some books and movies can help society.
• Guns should be made illegal.
• The legal drinking age should be changed to 18 for hard liquor and spirits, and to 16 for beer and wine.
• Should the government be able to access cell phone data?
• Paying waiters a hourly rate below minimum wage is unfair.
• Illegal immigrants are good for the economy.
• Decreasing the wealth tax is good for the economy.
• What caused the recession in the USA?
• Rich people should have tax breaks.
• Should students sometimes teach the class about a subject they are an expert on?
• Should schools offer sign language in addition to foreign languages?
• Any student caught cheating on an examination should be automatically dismissed from college.
• Should there be a dress code to prevent students from wearing revealing clothes?
• Government aid for students should be based purely on academic performance.
• Mobiles phones should be banned in schools for both students and teachers.
• How No Child Left Behind has not been implemented correctly.
• Foreign language instruction should begin in kindergarten.
• College students should have the freedom to choose their own courses.
• Should schools have single sex education?

See this page for a full list of Education Argumentative Speech Topics .

• How the USA can use renewable energy, and what role oil companies can play.
• How renewable energy technologies became economically and politically viable in the late 1990s.
• Destruction of the world’s forest is justified by human need for land and food.
• The racing industry should be forced to use environmentally-friendly fuel.
• The government should support and subsidize alternative energy sources.
• Alternative energy and hybrid vehicles can help save our planet.
• Penalties for crimes against the environment should be tougher.
• Vegetarianism is an ecologically thoughtful lifestyle.
• Has marine engineering increased pollution?
• Working from home is good for the environment.
• Rainforest logging should be banned.
• Hunting is good for the environment.
• The advantages of recycling water.

See this page for a full list of Environmental Argumentative Speech Topics .

• Should celebrities be held to a higher moral standard since they are often viewed as role models by children and teens?
• Convicted prisoners should not have better living conditions than those not in prison.
• Clothing and other items produced using child labor should not be imported and sold in the USA.
• Denying health insurance because of pre-existing conditions violates human rights.
• Using animals for scientific research is inhumane.
• DNA experiments on human embryos are unethical and should not be allowed.
• Zoos, aquariums, and circuses violate animal rights and should be shut down.
• Are beauty pageants exploitive?
• Should scientists bring back extinct species through cloning?
• People should not be allowed to keep exotic animals as pets.
• Should there be world population control?
• Stand up for what is right, even if you stand alone.
• Hunting is unethical and should not be allowed.
• Everyone in the world should have civil rights!
• Do you agree that honesty is the best policy?
• Assassination can never be justified.
• The sale of human organs should be legal.
• Euthanasia is not morally acceptable.
• Euthanasia should be legalized.
• Is human cloning ethical?
• Wearing fur is unethical.
• We shouldn’t eat meat.
• Every family with children filing for divorce must go through a mandatory ‘cooling off’ period.
• Adoptive parents should be legally bound to allow biological parents access to their children.
• Should babies younger than one get their ears pierced?
• Those who want children should take parenting classes and pass tests before having a child.
• Both parents should assume equal responsibility in raising a child.
• Strict parenting raises strong-hearted, resilient kids.
• Why both parents should be a part of their child’s life.
• Do curfews keep teens out of trouble?
• Why children should be respected.
• Should we have to pay to adopt a child?
• Teenagers should have more freedom than younger kids.
• Should kids under 13 be allowed on social media sites?
• Should children get to choose their living environment at age 13?
• Should parents be held responsible for actions of their children?

See this page for a full list of Family Argumentative Speech Topics . We also have a page with Speech Topics for Kids .

• The only difference between normal and organic food is the cost.

See this page for a full list of Speech Topic Ideas On Food, Drink, and Cooking .

• Why veterans should have more government support.
• Should the president have served in the military?
• Is the American criminal justice system racist?
• Democracy is the best form of government.
• Women make better presidents.
• Is our election process fair?
• Tap water is safer than bottled water in countries where the quality of tap water is regulated.
• Breastfeeding is one of the most important things a mother can do for a child.
• Should children born with birth defects have surgery?
• Lapses in food safety result from a complex interplay of factors.
• Should fast food restaurants stop adding chemicals to their food?
• Taxes should be imposed on unhealthy foods to combat obesity.
• GMOs are bad for health and should be avoided at any cost.
• Advertising of prescription drugs should not be allowed.
• Fast food advertisements and promotions should be banned.
• Terminally ill patients should be allowed to use heroin.
• Why people should smile when they’re happy, and pretend they are happy when feeling sad.
• Our identity is shaped by how others view us.
• The benefits of having friends.

See this page for a full list of  Argumentative Speech Topics on Health and Fitness . We also have a page with Medical Topics and Psychology topics.

• Was Mao Zedong a great leader?
• Adolf Hitler was a great leader.
• The negative effects of Ronald Reagan’s “War on Drugs.”

See this page for a full list of History Speech Topics .

• Is inequality in South Africa a suitable topic to use for public speaking?
• Should the world become one nation and have a council for leadership?
• The war in Iraq was justified.
• Terrorism is a major issue in the world because innocent people are affected.
• Cultural treasures should be returned to their countries of origin.
• Invading other countries, as long as for a good cause, is justified.
• The New Zealand flag should not be changed.
• War is an instrument of foreign policy.
• Driving speed limits should be lifted in areas with a low accident risk.
• People who use file-sharing sites to download content illegally should be found and prosecuted.
• Should the government give tax exemptions to those who drive electric or hybrid vehicles?
• Elderly drivers should be required to take a driving test each year after a certain age.
• Should colleges be allowed to use affirmative action to create a more diverse campus?
• Garbage disposal should not be free to encourage recycling (example: Switzerland).
• Salaries of actors, professional athletes and CEOs should be regulated and capped.
• Any products that are believed to cause cancer should have a warning label.
• Fast food, soda, chips and other unhealthy food should be heavily taxed.
• Making drugs illegal creates an environment for crime and violence.
• Should it be harder to get a divorce?
• Should the death penalty exist?
• Laws to protect the victims of domestic abuse should be enforced.
• Pitbulls and other aggressive dog breeds should not be allowed.
• Gay couples should have the same rights as heterosexual couples.
• Should the EPA make it illegal to modify your car for racing?
• DUI offenders should lose their license for a year.
• Should you have to take a training class to purchase fireworks?
• Workers should get four weeks paid vacation each year.
• Plastic surgery should be illegal for anyone under 18.
• Retirement should be made compulsory at the age of 60.
• Abortions should be legal in cases of rape and incest.
• The cost of prescription drugs should be regulated.
• Couples should be banned from adopting overseas.
• Banning smoking in public places is undemocratic.
• Spaying and neutering pets should be mandatory.
• Minors should be tried for murder at any age.
• Voting should be compulsory for all citizens.
• Illegal immigrants should receive asylum.
• Organ donation should be mandatory.
• Vaccinations should be compulsory.
• Prostitution should be legalized.
• Should abortion be made illegal?
• The smoking age should be lowered.
• The voting age should be lowered.
• Why smoking should be banned.
• Talking on the phone while driving should be banned.
• There should be equal pay for equal work.
• Does Shakespeare romanticize youth suicide in the tragic play Romeo and Juliet?
• Edgar Allen Poe’s career as an author benefitted from his difficult, grief-filled life.
• Popular literature is not as valuable as classical literature.
• Why books are better than their movies.
• Reality television makes people stupid and should be regulated.
• Does media violence lead to behavioral problems?
• TV cop shows are too intense for children.
• Watching television makes people smarter.
• Are kids having too much screen time?
• Is watching TV good or bad for children?
• Has the television become obsolete?
• Reality TV is not reality.
• Vulgar scenes in films should be reduced.
• Can anyone play an instrument with the right materials and instruction?
• The beneficial physiological effects of music.
• Americans should not get involved in conflicts that don’t concern the national interest.
• Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid reform are non-negotiable ways out of the debt crisis.
• Famous people (actors, athletes) should not be allowed to become politicians.
• Is the government doing justice to the taxpayers?
• Does age matter in relationships?
• Social networks are killing sincere relationships.
• Polygamy creates healthy relationships.
• If nothing happens without a cause, then the big bang must have been caused by God.
• Why it is better to have many religions.
• Banning burkhas or other religious clothing is against human rights.
• The world would be more peaceful without religions.
• Churches should be required to pay taxes.
• Are there any alternatives to evolution?
• Religion is a force for evil.

See this page for a full list of  Topics on Religion and Spirituality .

• Mobile phones shouldn’t be allowed at school.
• There is no place for religion in school.
• Technology is a distraction.
• Homework should be scrapped.
• High Schools need armed guards.
• Test scores reflect how good the teacher is.
• Refrain from dating in high school.
• Student ID cards should have tracking devices.
• Random drug tests need to be done in high schools.
• Teachers should also be graded.

See this page for a full list of  School Speech Topics  (Elementary, Middle School, High School).

• Genetically modified food should be the answer to the world’s hunger problem.
• Is Mars the next planet for human habitation?
• The NASA moon landing was a hoax.
• Space exploration is a waste of money.

See this page for a full list of  Science Speech Topics .

• Permits should not be needed to build small, permanent structures in the city of Baldwin.
• Technological progress signifies the decline of human moral, spiritual, and traditional values.
• Men and women face unequal pressure to change their bodies to look good.
• Sexual immorality in our society is a result of the influence of foreign films.
• People are not satisfied with what they have.
• Compulsory military service is good for society and the country.
• Christmas is just a way for businesses to increase sales.
• Billboards should not be allowed on interstate highways.
• Men should be forced to take paternity leave from work.
• Violent video games and toys should not be allowed.

See this page for a full list of Argumentative Society Speech Topics .

• Athletes caught using steroids should be banned from professional sports for life.
• Why cheerleading should be part of the Olympics.
• Why hockey should allow fights.
• Is marching band a sport?
• Is cheerleading a sport?
• Sports should be obligatory at school.

See this page for a full list of  Sports Speech Topics .

• Students should not have to learn cursive because technology is making it irrelevant.
• Social media has changed us for the worse.
• Modern technology has increased material wealth but not happiness.
• Has the internet made research easier and more convenient?
• How nuclear power shaped 21st century electrical generation.
• Technology makes us lose most of our traditions and culture.
• Life was better when technology was more simple.
• Human beings are becoming slaves of modern technology.
• Is the internet a good or a bad thing?
• Technology is making people less creative.
• The positive effects of technology on society.
• Are phones essential?
• Nuclear power is better than solar power.
• New technologies create problems.
• The impact of technology on society.
• How electronics affect our body.
• The pros and cons of Facebook.
• The pros and cons of plastic.
• Are children smarter or more socialized because of the internet?
• Modern offices should have facilities for an afternoon nap.
• Should tattoos be in the workplace?

List of Argumentative Essay Topics

• Dieting makes people fat.
• Romantic love is a poor basis for marriage.
• The war on terror has contributed to the growing abuse of human rights.
• High school graduates should take a year off before entering college.
• All citizens should be required by law to vote.
• All forms of government welfare should be abolished.
• Americans should have more holidays and longer vacation.
• Participating in team sports helps to develop good character.
• The production and sale of cigarettes should be made illegal.
• People have become overly dependent on technology.
• Censorship is sometimes justified.
• Privacy is not the most important right.
• Drunk drivers should be imprisoned on the first offence.
• The lost art of letter-writing deserves to be revived.
• Government and military personnel should have the right to strike.
• Most study-abroad programs should be renamed “party abroad”: they are a waste of time and money.
• The continuing decline of CD sales along with the rapid growth of music downloads signals a new era of innovation in popular music.
• College students should have complete freedom to choose their own courses.
• The solution to the impending crisis in Social Security is the immediate elimination of this anachronistic government program.
• The primary mission of colleges and universities should be preparing students for the workforce.
• Financial incentives should be offered to high school students who perform well on standardizing tests.
• All students in high school and college should be required to take at least two years of a foreign language.
• College students in the U.S. should be offered financial incentives to graduate in three years rather than four.
• College athletes should be exempted from regular class-attendance policies.
• To encourage healthy eating, higher taxes should be imposed on soft drinks and junk food.
• Students should not be required to take physical education courses.
• To conserve fuel and save lives, the 55 miles-per-hour national speed limit should be restored.
• All citizens under the age of 21 should be required to pass a driving education course before receiving a license to drive.
• Freshmen should not be required to purchase a meal plan from the college.
• Zoos are internment camps for animals and should be shut down.
• University students should not be penalized for illegally downloading music, movies, or other protected content.
• Government financial aid for students should be based solely on merit.
• Nontraditional students should be exempted from regular class-attendance policies.
• At the end of each term, student evaluations of faculty should be posted online.
• A student organization should be formed to rescue and care for the feral cats on campus.
• People who contribute to Social Security should have the right to choose how their money is invested.
• Professional baseball players convicted of using performance-enhancing drugs should not be considered for induction into the Hall of Fame.
• Any citizen who does not have a criminal record should be permitted to carry a concealed weapon.
• Is global climate change man-made?
• Do colleges put too much stock in standardized test scores?
• Is torture ever acceptable?
• Should men get paternity leave from work?
• Is a lottery a good idea?
• Do we have a fair taxation system?
• Is cheating out of control?
• Are parents clueless about child predators on the Internet?
• Are cell phones dangerous?
• Are law enforcement cameras an invasion of privacy?
• Are test scores a good indication of a school’s competency?
• Do we have a throw-away society?
• Is child behavior better or worse than it was years ago?
• Should companies market to children?
• Should the government have a say in our diets?
• Does access to condoms prevent teen pregnancy?
• Does access to condoms lead to irresponsible, dangerous, or bad behavior?
• Are actors and professional athletes paid too much?
• Are CEOs paid too much?
• Do violent video games cause behavior problems?
• Should creationism be taught in public schools?
• Should the racing industry be forced to use biofuels?
• When should parents let teens make their own decisions?
• Should the military be allowed to recruit at high schools?
• Should the alcohol drinking age be increased or decreased?
• What age is appropriate for dating?
• Are there benefits to attending a single-sex school?
• Does boredom lead to trouble?
• Does participation in sports keep teens out of trouble?
• Is competition good?
• Does religion cause war?
• Should the government provide health care?
• Should girls ask boys out?
• Is fashion important?
• Are girls too mean to each other?
• Is homework harmful or helpful?
• Should students be allowed to grade their teachers?
• Is college admission too competitive?
• There is no such thing as a superfood!
• American football is better than rugby.
• Abused children grow up to be abusers
• Women priests have further weakened the influence of the church today
• Britain should exit the EU and concentrate on its special relationship with America
• Most asylum seekers are simply seeking a better life
• Who was the better wartime Prime Minister – Churchill or Thatcher?
• Insurance is a waste of money
• North Korea postulates but will never go to war
• Lady Gaga is a better role model than Madonna
• Celebrities adopting multi-racial kids is merely another cog in their publicity wheel
• Sororities do nothing to enhance the cause of womanhood
• All phobias can be cured
• America is seen as a safe haven for victims of persecution from all over the world
• There are more benefits to working in a small company than a large one
• Men do not understand the term “fashionista”
• Scottish independence would be a good thing for the UK
• Seeds are not a health food. They are bird food.
• Government spying on personal communication is an infringement of civil liberty
• Payday loans are the worst financial product ever
• What is the point of massive R&D projects like the Hadron Collider and space exploration when people are starving?
• All immigrants to English speaking countries should pass a test before being allowed rights to settle and be re-tested after 10 years.
• Only the supermarkets win in price wars
• The Burkha is a lasting symbol that Islam is divisive
• Space travel should be a rich man’s plaything and government funds diverted to things that matter
• Pipe smoking is less harmful than cigarette smoking
• Politicians don’t have a “calling” – it is merely a well paid job
• Ireland would be no better if it were one country
• Global warming is just a phase in the planet’s life cycle
• Cigarettes will never be banned completely because Governments couldn’t work without the income they generate
• Beauty pageants are exploitative
• Condoms should be dispensed free in high schools
• Professional athletes are paid too much
• Most schools fail at adequate sex education
• Aids is the forgotten disease now that it affects mainly African countries
• Legalizing some drugs will not combat the scourge
• The legal limit of 21 encourages underage drinking
• Video games do not cause violent behavior: Violence comes from values
• Should creationism be taught in schools
• High school is not competitive enough and does not encourage high standards of achievement in everyone
• CEOS of public service industries are paid too much
• Britain should adopt a new voting system
• In a society that calls for equality, men should receive a decent period of paternity leave
• Torture has a place in the fight against terrorism
• Many parents have no idea of what their child is doing on the computer
• Standardized test scores are not the best indication of a student’s aptitude for a certain course.
• Should we have a national high school exam?
• Is Private school tuition (elementary, high school or college) really worth it?
• Does state wide testing like TAKS/STAAR test in Texas really increase student knowledge?
• Should colleges abolish reliance on SAT and ACT scores in admissions?
• How should our school system in America be reformed?
• Should America adopt an educational system more like Europe?
• What causes students to graduate high school without basic skills?
• How do American students compare with students from other countries?
• What Role should technology play in Education?
• What is the value of a liberal arts education?
• Should students be required to take foreign language courses (or any other type of specific course)?
• Does adding school days really improve learning?
• Should schools continue to spend money on fine arts?
• How should students whose first language is not English be taught in public schools?
• Should college athletes be paid?
• Does smoking help make acquaintances?
• Should students add their teachers as friends on Facebook?
• Is the first impression of a person always right?
• Are conflicts necessary for healthy relationships?
• Should lecture attendance be optional?
• Is business ethics an obsolete concept?
• Should companies try to copy what their competitors do?
• Can businesses learn from their customers’ complaints?
• Should all energy drinks be banned?
• Is China a new superpower?
• Should employees be allowed to use social media sites at work?
• Should companies send ‘happy birthday’ messages to clients?
• Would Shakespeare’s plays be more interesting if shortened?
• Should internet slang, like ‘LOL’ and ‘IMHO’ be included in dictionaries?
• Does the English language need to be simpler?
• Should kids be allowed to draw on walls?
• Do modern schools depend too much on technology?
• Do online students have better chances to cheat?
• Should hospitals use placebo treatments?
• Do innovations really make us lazier?
• Can college athletes be smart?
• Should students have profiles on all major social networks?
• Should people abandon cash and use plastic cards only?
• Should countries have ‘1 car per family’ policies?
• Should we preserve old buildings as historical monuments?
• Are some TV ads objects of art?
• Is music in shopping malls harmful to employees’ wellbeing?
• Can listening to favorite music heal?
• Should journalists who distort the truth to make the news more sensational be punished?
• Should all TV channels have censorship?
• Do SOPA and PIPA make pirates more skilful?
• Is negative PR the secret behind Justin Bieber’s success?
• Should Wikipedia give diplomas to their most faithful readers?
• Can diamonds be girls’ best friends?
• Is the way to a man’s heart through his stomach?
• Should couples live together before marriage?
• Should parents tell their kids stories about birds and bees?
• Can virtual reality be dangerous for kids?
• Can we call any war ‘a peacemaking operation’?
• Is too much political correctness making communication more confusing?
• Are early marriages more likely to end in divorces?
• Do elderly people receive better care in retirement homes than with family members?
• Should hyperactive kids receive treatment?
• Should mind reading during poker games be banned?
• Should parents pass tests before homeschooling their kids?
• Should parents lie to their kids about Santa Claus?
• Does Beavis and Butthead  have a negative impact on youth?
• Is it fair to use the results of standardized tests to define schools’ budgets?
• Are optimism and success infectious?
• Is the Bermuda triangle a creation of our imagination?
• Advertising: Information Or Manipulation?
• Should Affirmative Action Be Abolished?
• Should Minors Be Executed For Murder?
• Should Parents Be Held Responsible For Their Minor’s Crimes?
• Should Gay Clubs Be Allowed In High Schools?
• Should High School Education Be Mandatory?
• Should Affirmative Action be abolished?
• Should schools place more emphasis on disciplining?
• To what extent has the traditional male role changed in the last 20 years?
• Dieting Does Not Help People Lose Weight
• Is gender equality a myth or a sustainable reality?
• Should divorce be harder to obtain?
• Should marijuana be legalized in the United States?
• Should the legalization of marijuana be a state law or left up to the federal government to enforce?
• Are colleges and schools just for either all girls or all boys fair or are they sexist?
• Should corporal punishment be used to punish children?
• Should the US drinking age be lowered or raised from age 21?
• How young is too young to have your own cellphone?
• Should immigrants to the US be required to learn English before being granted citizenship?
• Should those applying for Welfare be drug tested?
• Are fast food chains killing people?
• Should those receiving government assistance have a limit on the number of children they can receive help for?
• Should news reporters be required to share their sources with viewers?
• What role, if any, should the federal government take in dealing with the problem of homelessness?
• Should women also be required to sign up for the draft at age 18 in the US?
• Should those younger than 13 be allowed to have a Facebook or Myspace (or other social networking account)?
• Should public school teachers be randomly drug tested as a condition for employment?
• Is year-round school a good idea or bad?
• Should gay couples be allowed to adopt children?
• Should the families of organ donors be compensated for their loved one’s donation?
• Damage to the environment is an inevitable consequence of worldwide improvements in the standard of living.
• Are famous people treated unfairly by the media? Should they be given more privacy, or is the price of their fame an invasion into their private lives?
• Are women better parents than men?
• Are zoos necessary for education?
• Children learn best by observing the behavior of adults and copying it.
• Children should never be educated at home by their parents.
• Computers can translate all kinds of languages well. Do our children need to learn more languages in the future?
• Advantages and disadvantages of giving international aid to poor countries.
• Do the benefits of study abroad justify the difficulties?
• Do we become used to bad news? Would it be better if more good news was reported?
• Does foreign aid helps donor countries more than the recipients?
• Does travel help to promote understanding and communication between countries?
• Education is the single most important factor in the development of a country.
• The destruction of the world’s forests is inevitable as our need for land and food grows.
• A vegetarian diet is as healthy as a diet containing meat.
• If children behave badly, should their parents accept responsibility and also be punished?
• In what ways has information technology changed work and working practices in the past 10 years?
• Should government intervene in the rights of the individual with regard to family planning?
• In your opinion what factors contribute to a good movie?
• Most high level jobs are done by men. Should the government encourage a certain percentage of these jobs to be reserved for women?
• News editors should decide what to broadcast on TV and what to print in newspapers.
• Should developing countries concentrate on improving industrial skills or should they promote education first?
• Should money be spent on space exploration?
• Should retirement be compulsory at 65 years of age?
• Should rich countries forgive all debts for poor countries?
• Should rich countries pay more for environmental damage?
• Should sports classes be dropped in secondary school so students can concentrate on academic subjects?
• Should the same laws which prohibit the sale and consumption of heroin be applied to tobacco?
• To what extent should universities function as training grounds for employment?
• To what extent should university courses be geared to the economic needs of society?
• What are factors which are related to academic success in high-school students?
• What should a government do for a country to become successful?
• Free meals should be provided in every school.
• Citizens should be taxed a percentage to send towards medical research.
• All motor vehicles should be pushed towards electric power.
• Prisoners should be used in the workforce.
• Dieting does more harm than good.
• Chivalry has no place in modern society.
• Sexism is still a major problem in the workplace.
• Government welfare is an excuse for laziness.
• Capitalism is another name for evil.
• National security is an excuse for war.
• 9/11 was an excuse for continuous war.
• Privacy is a luxury not a right.
• The age of consent should be raised.
• The federal government should control the laws of each state.
• Average workplace hours are too long.
• Oppressive regimes shouldn’t be given any monetary aid.
• The death penalty should be reintroduced.
• All people should be allowed to strike.
• The music industry needs to get with the times.
• A college education needs to be about preparing for the world of work.
• There are too many degree options in colleges.
• All citizens should speak a second language.
• People should be encouraged to holiday abroad.
• Restrictions on fuel consumption need to be implemented.
• People should be encouraged to start their own businesses.
• All citizens should dedicate an hour a week to community service.
• Cheating on an examination should be a criminal offense.
• Pornography should be illegal.
• Brothels should be legalised.
• All states should gain equal representation in elections.
• Presidential elections should be held every five years.
• The restriction on consecutive presidential terms should be removed.
• Financial aid shouldn’t be given to people with a criminal record.
• People should have a bigger say in how the country is run.
• The military needs to see major cuts.
• An emphasis on sport in college should be removed.
• Social Security Numbers should be abolished.
• Elderly people shouldn’t drive.
• The rich should pay more tax.
• Tax avoidance should be clamped down upon.
• Essays are not an accurate reflection of a student’s ability.
• There are too many people in the U.S.
• Immigration caps should be tightened.
• Should people be able to choose to have health care or not?
• Are we too dependent on foreign oil?
• Is the education policy ‘No Child Left behind’ working?
• The media affects young children’s minds
• Does the ‘old boy network’ still exist?
• Should prostitution be legalized?
• Divorced parents should always share custody of their children
• Social media is ruining relationships
• Convicted prisoners have a better life in prison than out
• Society and laws are too lenient on Child Sex offenders
• Should racial profiling be legal?
• Are Americans sexual prudes?
• Is euthanasia inhumane?
• Is Michael Jordan the best basketball player of all time?
• Should people have to take a test to become parents?
• Italians are healthier because they drink red wine
• Are humans solely responsible for GlobalWarming?
• Cheating helps children learn.
• Are vampires real or only in the novels characters?
• File-sharing programs on the Internet should/ not be banned.
• What is the relationship between illegal immigration and crime
• People who download from file sharing websites should be prosecuted.
• Rich people should be allowed to pay off their crimes.
• Corruption in society is an unstoppable force.
• Doctors should learn about religion before practicing.
• Rationing of fuel is a good idea.
• Sodomy isn’t a sin.
• Political figures are out of touch with society.
• Public figures should be struck off if they break the law.
• All men and women should complete a year of civil service.
• Community service isn’t a punishment.

509 Informative Speech Ideas and Topics

243 Easy and Simple Speech Topics

7 thoughts on “613 Original Argumentative Speech Topics Ideas”

can money buy happiness?

I like this page

I think you’re ideas are from the far left, the “topics” you have are just so one sided im yawning just reading them. COME ON!

Most of these “topics” you list aren’t original. I’ve heard these be argued on the news and in class many times before. Only about 10 of these topics even peaked my interest.

Stand up for what is right even if you stand alone

how does one have a pet?

Only 7 of these actually had me thinking. Some aren’t even original. I’ve seen the ‘Should the death penalty exist’ on almost every single site I’ve tried before this.

Leave a Comment

I accept the Privacy Policy

Reach out to us for sponsorship opportunities

Vivamus integer non suscipit taciti mus etiam at primis tempor sagittis euismod libero facilisi.

© 2024 My Speech Class