Skip to Main Content

Lesson 1

We will study a model argument to see how a philosophy professor has developed a research-based case for his position. Working from our draft delineation plan for our arguments, we will develop a final set of claims and counterclaims and an approach to reasoning that will organize our final argument.

Lesson Goals

  • Can I delineate and explain the structure of a research-based model argument about “Mandatory Vaccination and the Limits of Parents Rights"?

  • Can I plan a sequence of the claims and evidence I will use to support my argument about a public health controversy?

Texts

Core

  • Unit Reader
    • “Measles, Mumps, and Religious Freedom: Mandatory Vaccination and the Limits of Parental Rights,” Christopher O. Tollefson, Public Discourse, 2019

Optional

  • Digital Access
    • “Counterpoint: Should Childhood Vaccination against Measles Be a Mandatory Requirement for Attending School? No,” Peter Schröder-Bäck and Kyriakos Martakis, Chest Journal, 2015

Materials

Tools

Reference Guides

Question Sets

Editable Google Docs

Activity 1: Read – Write – Discuss

In preparation for analyzing a model argument about the limits of parental rights, we will preview the article, taking note of who its author and publisher are, the general organization of the argument, and the lead sentence.

Step 1

With a partner, skim the article "Measles, Mumps, and Religious Freedom: Mandatory Vaccination and the Limits of Parents Rights," noting its title and the four headings that organize it. Annotate key words in these five phrases, noting clues to what the argument will be about, and what its perspective and position are likely to be.

Read and annotate the lead sentences that are found before the first paragraph of the article:

It is a mark of responsible governance … but it is an error to see vaccination policy as an essential battleground for defense of these important rights.

Make a list of important, but potentially challenging words and phrases that you find in these two sentences. Try to use context clues to determine the meaning of key words and phrases, such as authoritarian overreach. For other words, consult a dictionary and write down their definitions in your Vocabulary Journal.

Step 2

As a class, discuss what you have learned by analyzing the title and headers of the article, its lead sentence, and the language Christopher Tollefsen uses to express his ideas.

  1. What do you anticipate will be the perspective of the article, relative to the balancing act of the common good and individual rights?

To determine more about the article’s source, go to the Witherspoon Institute’s Public Discourse website. Navigate the website to learn more about the Witherspoon Institute and its mission, and about Tollefsen. Respond to the following questions:

  1. Based on what you learn, what further assumptions might you make about the article, its perspective, and its likely approach to the ethical issues involved with mandatory vaccinations?

  2. What might you guess is the purpose of the argument and its intended audience?

Activity 2: Read – Write

We will read and annotate a model argument written by a philosophy professor about how vaccinations should not be a battleground for the defense of personal liberty. We will think more about the argument’s perspective, purpose, and audience.

In preparation for a class discussion of a model argument, individually read and annotate "Measles, Mumps, and Religious Freedom: Mandatory Vaccination and the Limits of Parental Rights," written by a University of South Carolina philosophy professor for Public Discourse from the Witherspoon Institute.

Using the Delineating Arguments Tool, identify the major claims used by the author to develop the argument, and note whether you think each statement is one of the following:

  • a claim made by the author as a cornerstone of his argument

  • a summation of an opposing claim that might be made by someone with a different view of the issues and ethics

  • a counterclaim made by Tollefson in response to an opposing claim or argument

Note the pattern of claim statements in the argument.

Having read and analyzed the argument, think further about its perspective, purpose, and audience.

Draft a statement that summarizes the ethical position Tollefsen is taking.

Activity 3: Discuss – Write

As a class, we will study the structure of the model argument, and the ways that the author has used ethical perspectives and approaches to set up, explain, and support his position and claims.

Step 1

In a class discussion, share what you have hypothesized or concluded about the model argument’s perspective, purpose, and audience.

Discuss the argument in terms of questions from the Analyzing Ethical Issues Question Set:

Philosophical Issues and Approaches

  1. The Common Good: In what ways does the argument reflect consideration of the common good?

  2. Individual Rights and Personal Liberty: In what ways does the argument reflect consideration of individual rights or personal liberty?

Public Health Issues and Controversies

  1. Mandates and Objections: In what ways does the argument address the controversy between governmental mandates and citizen objections?

Step 2

As a class, use the Delineating Arguments Tool to identify the elements of the argument about "Measles, Mumps, and Religious Freedom: Mandatory Vaccination and the Limits of Parental Rights," noting its issue, perspective, and position.

Discuss the major claims you have identified in the argument, considering whether each is one of the following:

  • a claim made by the author as a cornerstone of his argument

  • a summation of an opposing claim that might be made by someone with a different view of the issues and ethics

  • a counterclaim made by Tollefson in response to an opposing claim or argument

Based on what you have noticed and analyzed, make observations about the pattern of thinking that seems to be developed in the argument.

Step 3

Using the information presented on the Delineating Arguments Tool, consider which of the argumentation models most closely reflects the organization and reasoning used by the author in this argument.

Compare and discuss your analyses of the argument’s structure. Consider how the argument might be different if written from another reasoning approach.

Activity 4: Read – Discuss – Write

We will examine the claims made by tollefsen more closely, studying their language, syntax, type, and sequence.

Step 1

Access the Tollefsen Claims and Counterclaims Handout, which identifies 16 claim statements made by Tollefsen as he develops his argument about mandatory vaccination and the limits of parental rights. Note the pattern in Column 3 of how the claims are classified by type, as either a claim, opposing claim, or counterclaim.

As a class, discuss what this pattern tells you about the organization of the argument, as explained in the Delineating Arguments Tool.

Step 2

Individually, read through the transcriptions of the claim statements in Column 2. Select one claim statement that you find to be particularly important and well-written. For this statement, do the following in your Vocabulary Journal and Mentor Sentence Journal:

  1. Identify key vocabulary or challenging words in the claim statement and add them to your Vocabulary Journal.

  2. Paraphrase what the claim statement seems to be saying, in as direct a sentence as possible.

  3. Explain why you think the claim statement is important in developing the overall argument.

  4. Discuss why you agree or disagree with the claim statement.

  5. Find an interesting or powerful sentence and record it in your Mentor Sentence Journal. Following the syntax and language of the sentence, write a new sentence that you might use in your own argument.

Step 3

Work with a partner to discuss the mentor sentence you wrote down in your Mentor Sentence Journal. Use the following questions to guide your discussion:

  1. Why did you select this sentence?

  2. What is unique about the word choice in this sentence?

  3. What is unique about the syntax in this sentence?

  4. What tone is conveyed by the author in this sentence? How do you know?

  5. How does the sentence contribute to your understanding of the ideas in the text?

Activity 5: Write

Considering the model and other arguments we have delineated in the unit, we will finalize a sequence of claims that will be used as premises in the defense of our argumentative position, including at least one specific counterclaim.

Thinking about the model argument, determine which of the approaches to organization and reasoning might work best for your argument. Refer to the Section 3 Diagnostic Delineating Arguments Tool you developed in Section 3 for the Section Diagnostic. Consider if you might use Tollefsen’s model argument or another you have read as an organizational model for your work.

Activity 6: Write

We will determine the order in which we want to develop our claims, considering both deductive and inductive organizational models, as well as arguments that are built almost exclusively as counterarguments to an existing argument.

Based on your thinking about the best approach to reasoning and organization for your argument, determine a final sequence for the claims and counterclaims you intend to develop. Identify which claims are more informational or explanatory in nature and which claims are the actual building blocks, or premises, of the argument that will prove your position.