Blog #4

Warrants are the general beliefs about an argument. They are the commonly accepted attitudes about subjects. They do not have to be written out in the argument because the warrants are assumed, and spelling them out would be redundant and boring. So, it is best when the warrants are shared between the author and the audience. In the book Essentials of Argument, the author states, “if the audience shares the warrants with the arguer, the audience will accept them, and the argument is convincing. If the warrants are in conflict and the audience does not accept them, the argument is not convincing to them.” (102) Warrants provide connections between the reader and the arguer attempting to make the argument more convincing. So, when there is discrepancies between the two there is little they can relate to which makes it difficult for the argument to be successful. The warrant unites the claim and the support so that the audience can accept certain assertions. To provide an example, someone from Japan might not understand a certain warrant about our president, but an American citizen would hold similar assumptions about the president with an American author. As long as cultural values are the same and it is a big enough generalization, the arguer and the audience can share warrants.

Wood, Nancy V.. Essentials of Arguments. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2006.