Which type of argument structure is newer and best when logical arguments dominate?Group of answer choicesToulminianRogerianClassical

To determine which type of argument structure is newer and best when logical arguments dominate, let's analyze the three options provided: Toulminian, Rogerian, and Classical argument structures.

1. Toulminian Argument Structure: Developed by Stephen Toulmin in the 20th century, this structure is particularly useful for practical arguments. It emphasizes the need for warrants and backing to connect claims to evidence, making it highly adaptable to complex situations. The Toulmin model addresses the counterarguments directly, making it favorable in logical discussions.

2. Rogerian Argument Structure: This structure, named after psychologist Carl Rogers, also gained prominence in the 20th century. It focuses on finding common ground and understanding opposing viewpoints. While effective in reducing conflict, it may not emphasize logical arguments as strongly.

3. Classical Argument Structure: This structure dates back to ancient rhetoric and involves a clear presentation of the argument with an introduction, narration, confirmation, refutation, and conclusion. While foundational and still widely taught, it may be seen as more traditional compared to the other two.

Conclusion

The Toulminian argument structure is the newest of the three, and its focus on logical reasoning, including support for claims and acknowledgment of counterarguments, makes it highly suitable when logical arguments dominate discussions.

Final Answer

Toulminian Argument Structure is the newer and best option when logical arguments dominate.