The 10 types of arguments to use in debates and discussions

Scientists of the mind have long believed that man is a fundamentally rational animal, thinking through logic.

However, this idea can be questioned, for example, every time we start to analyze the types of arguments that we usually use to defend our points of view in debates and discussions. The argumentative fallacies make constant appearances, and many times neither we nor the interlocutor realize it.

However, this does not mean that there are no valid types of argument through which we can contribute to debates in a solvent way. This is a selection of the main types of arguments classified according to various criteria.

Types of arguments according to their content

First, we will see the classes of arguments classified according to the type of content on which they are based. These distinctions allow a better understanding of their nature and the way in which they are used.

1. Value-based arguments

They are arguments that are based on highlighting the ethical values ​​that an option has, be they good or bad. This type of argument is useful if the topic you are talking about is fundamentally philosophical and moral, that is, if you are talking about what should be done and what actions should be prioritized.

However, they do not serve to describe objective reality, and if they are used for this, they can fall into a type of logical fallacy called ad consecuentiam argument.

2. Arguments based on descriptions

An overview is a way of putting together several arguments in one to defend an idea.. For example, to argue for the position that birds are dinosaurs, one can talk about feathers found in many theropod fossils, about the anatomical similarities that many of them had with birds current, etc.

3. Data-driven arguments

They are a class of arguments based on very concrete and specific pieces of information, usually extracted from scientific research or databases. They serve to reinforce arguments, offering them empirical support.

4. Arguments based on authority

In this type of argument, the position defended by an authority on the subject is indicated, indicating that it has more value than others. In many cases, it can lead to a logical fallacy: after all, the fact that an idea is defended by a specialist does not make it true.

However, it is a consistent argument when it comes to countering a fallacy of authority. For example, if someone defends the idea that the Earth is flat because a neighbor who reads a lot has said it, it can be replied that the true specialists on the subject argue that it is rather spherical, implying this that it is necessary to provide much evidence to refute this idea since both positions are not on equal footing. terms.

5. Definition-based arguments

These types of arguments are not based on how the world works, but in the use made of concepts and definitions. However, in many cases these arguments are not effective, because the meaning of the words can change depending on the moment and the context in which they have been used.

6. Arguments based on experiments

In this case, the argument is based on an experience carried out in the same place where there is dialogue and that serves to support the idea defended by oneself. In addition, it is very useful to convince, since it includes a "spectacular" part that is expressed beyond words, that is, in deeds.

7. Arguments based on thought experiments

This type of argument is a mix between the previous two, since it is supported by an experience in which the interlocutor has to participate but it is not carried out in the real world. It is about imagining a situation that is progressing to a point where the only reasonable conclusion is that the idea that we defend is fulfilled. For example, if someone says that he could never be friends with a foreigner, it is relatively easy to make him see otherwise through this type of argument.

Types of arguments according to the way they are used

If before we have classified the types of arguments according to their content, now we will see how they can be used to show relationships between ideas

8. Indication of the fallacy

They are types of arguments in which it is indicated why the reasoning that someone has used is not valid, as it is based on a fallacy. That is, the speech of the other is analyzed and the parts that in themselves are unfounded and misleading are highlighted.

9. Comparison arguments

In this class of arguments two ideas are compared with each other, to show how one of them is better than the other. They are effective in offering global assessments along story lines.

10. Interpellation arguments

In these arguments a series of questions are asked to the interlocutor to show in real time to what extent he is wrong on a topic. It is an exercise reminiscent of Socratic dialogue, since they lead the opponent to fall into a trap that is within his own discourse, entering into contradictions.