Toulmin Model of Argument:
The twentieth-century British philosopher Stephen Toulmin noticed that good, realistic arguments typically
will consist of six parts. He used these terms to describe the items.
Data: The facts or evidence used to prove the argument
Claim: The statement being argued (a thesis)
Warrants: The general, hypothetical (and often implicit) logical statements that serve as bridges between the
claim and the data.
Qualifiers: Statements that limit the strength of the argument or statements that propose the conditions under
which the argument is true.
Rebuttals: Counter-arguments or statements indicating circumstances when the general argument does not
Backing: Statements that serve to support the warrants (i.e., arguments that don’t necessarily prove the main
point being argued, but which do prove the warrants are true.)
Toulmin’s diagram of arguments typically looks something like this example:
An argument written in this manner unfolds to reveal both the strengths and limits of the argument. This is as
it should be. No argument should pretend to be stronger than it is or apply further than it is meant to. The
point here isn’t to “win” or “beat” all the counter-arguments; the point is to come as close to the truth or as
close to a realistic and feasible solution as we possibly can. Note that opening structure of “Data” leads to
“Claim with qualifiers” is similar to the structure of a thesis in the form of an enthymeme, in which
leads to [another clause presenting an argument.]
Toulmin’s model reminds us that arguments are generally expressed with qualifiers and rebuttals rather than
asserted as absolutes. This lets the reader know how to take the reasoning, how far it is meant to be applied,
and how general it is meant to be. Here is an example from John Gage’s The Shape of Reason in which the
various parts of an argument are labeled:
Congress should ban animal research (Claim #1) because animals are tortured in experiments that
have no necessary benefit for humans such as the testing of cosmetics (Data). The well being of
animals is more important than the profits of the cosmetics industry (Warrant). Only congress has the
authority to make such a law (Warrant) because the corporations can simply move from state to state
to avoid legal penalties (Backing). Of course, this ban should not apply to medical research (Qualifier). A
law to ban all research would go too far (Rebuttal).
So, the law would probably (qualifier) have to be carefully written to define the kinds of research
intended (claim #2).
The Toulmin model is useful for analyzing an argument you are reading. That was Toulmin’s original
purpose–the analysis of how arguments work. On the other hand, some students find it useful to use the
Toulmin model as a basis for structure and organization. We might organize our essay in the following
I. Introduction of the problem or topic.
A. Material to get the reader’s attention (a “hook”)
B. Introduce the problem or topic
C. Introduce our claim or thesis, perhaps with accompanying qualifiers that limit the scope of
the argument. (NB: This will help you cut the topic down to a manageable length.)
II. Offer data (reasons or evidence) to support the argument.
A. Datum #1
B. Datum #2
C. (and so on)
III. Explore warrants that show how the data logically is connected to the data
A. Warrant #1
B. Warrant #2
C. (and so on)
IV. Offer factual backing to show that logic used in the warrants is good in term of realism as well
A. Backing for Warrant #1
B. Backing for Warrant #2
C. (and so on)
V. Discuss counter-arguments and provide rebuttal
A. Counter-argument #1
B. Rebuttal to counter-argument #1
C. Counter-argument #2
D. Rebuttal to counter-argument #2
E. (and so on)
A. Implications of the argument, summation of points, or final evocative thought to ensure the
reader remembers the argument.
Do you need a customized paper? Place an order with us!