Warrants Essay
Radha Vishnubhotla
Mrs. Pankratz
AP English Language
29 January 2015
The Insider Warrants a Response The Toulmin argument asserts that most arguments have three parts: the claim, the reason, and the warrant. The claim is the action that a person executes, while the reason is explains why the person carried out his/her action. However, the reason often needs proof or, as Toulmin calls it, evidence. This gives the reason validation and explains the purpose of the claim/action. The warrant, on the other hand, provides the audience with underlying assumptions that are often implied. Warrants are generally values that people hold; if the audience accepts the warrant, the claim can be developed. However, if the audience disputes the warrant, then it must be defended with backing— another Toulmin term. Essentially the claim is the action; the reason, the cause of the action; the warrant, the value that leads to the claim. Dr. Jeffrey Wigand worked for a few years for the tobacco company Brown and Williamson. However, his boss Sandefur fires Wigand for “poor communication skills.” At first, his wife is devastated that he lost his job, mainly for healthcare reasons. The doctor’s daughter has acute asthma and Wigand’s job provided him and his family with healthcare benefits. Nonetheless, as part of his severance package, the company agrees to continue providing Wigand with a health and welfare package as long he agrees to sign a confidentiality contract, which he does. Later, a journalist from the well-respected 60 Minutes, requests Wigand to help him reveal information about the tobacco industry. Because Wigand signed a confidentiality agreement contract, he chooses to not release and corporate information from Brown and Williamson, since he values his integrity and his family.
Dr. Jeffrey Wigand, through his expertise and involvement in the tobacco company, single-handedly devastated the Brown and Williamson corporation. At first, Wigand is fired from the company due
Mrs. Pankratz
AP English Language
29 January 2015
The Insider Warrants a Response The Toulmin argument asserts that most arguments have three parts: the claim, the reason, and the warrant. The claim is the action that a person executes, while the reason is explains why the person carried out his/her action. However, the reason often needs proof or, as Toulmin calls it, evidence. This gives the reason validation and explains the purpose of the claim/action. The warrant, on the other hand, provides the audience with underlying assumptions that are often implied. Warrants are generally values that people hold; if the audience accepts the warrant, the claim can be developed. However, if the audience disputes the warrant, then it must be defended with backing— another Toulmin term. Essentially the claim is the action; the reason, the cause of the action; the warrant, the value that leads to the claim. Dr. Jeffrey Wigand worked for a few years for the tobacco company Brown and Williamson. However, his boss Sandefur fires Wigand for “poor communication skills.” At first, his wife is devastated that he lost his job, mainly for healthcare reasons. The doctor’s daughter has acute asthma and Wigand’s job provided him and his family with healthcare benefits. Nonetheless, as part of his severance package, the company agrees to continue providing Wigand with a health and welfare package as long he agrees to sign a confidentiality contract, which he does. Later, a journalist from the well-respected 60 Minutes, requests Wigand to help him reveal information about the tobacco industry. Because Wigand signed a confidentiality agreement contract, he chooses to not release and corporate information from Brown and Williamson, since he values his integrity and his family.
Dr. Jeffrey Wigand, through his expertise and involvement in the tobacco company, single-handedly devastated the Brown and Williamson corporation. At first, Wigand is fired from the company due