All flaws in arguments come from the assumptions. The assumption is the criteria you need to assume to get from the reasons they provide to support their conclusion, to the conclusion of their argument. If the assumption isn't likely or unwarranted, then the argument is flawed. Flawed assumptions and flawed arguments take the forms of fallacies. These are good to know off by heart, but there are so many [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies] that it isn't worth trying to remember them all (hell, I struggle to remember the 14 that I need to know off by heart for exams), and the chances are that you won't need to know all of them when you do get into an argument. It's best to remember a key few such as:
[ul]
[li]Ad Hominem (attacking the person instead of the argument)[/li]
[li]Straw Man (attacking a slightly different, easier to attack argument)[/li]
[li]Appeal to Popularity/ Mass of Numbers (saying that something is right because it's popular/ people believe that it's right)[/li]
[li]Tu Quoque (saying that your actions are justified because someone of someone else's actions)[/li]
[li]Appeal to History/ Tradition or Appeal to Novelty (saying that something's good because it's old/ it's what we used to do or because it's new)[/li]
[/ul]
VanityGirl also made a thread [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.152038-How-to-Argue-a-Point-A-users-guide#3616612] a while back on the subject (more general advice than specifics like I've listed). Try reading it for a few tips which are different to my own.
Freebird. said:
Be prepared. Don't get into an argument if you don't know your facts. And never get angry, it just makes you look immature.
These are also very important points. As much advice as we give, you still need to have an idea what you're talking about, otherwise your points will be proven wrong and your argument invalid quite quickly (I've had this happen to me before, you really do look like an idiot after doing it). And getting stressed will make you more hasty in thinking, thus making your argument worse as a result, as well as making you look immature.
dimensione510 said:
Numbers. Use the power of numbers and statistics, make them up if you have to (within reason). People respect anything with a %. They're also harder to argue against.
That's how to write rhetorics, not how to argue. There's a big difference. Namely that writing rhetorics is to persuade people when you don't actually have reasoning to support your conclusion, and can seem very pathetic if you're caught doing so/ called out on it.
Frequen-Z said:
I have an A Level in Critical Thinking so this is one area I like to think I have expertise in.
I'm currently doing an A2 in Critical Thinking, surprisingly enough.