Argument mapping - why, what, and how?
It is often difficult to keep track of all the arguments that arise in a discussion. As it delves into increasingly complex topics, taking all relevant arguments into account becomes nearly impossible. Furthermore, biases (which we all have to some extent) make it even harder to argue constructively because we tend to give more weight to arguments that agree with our pre-existing beliefs and convictions.
Having discussion moderators, summarizing key points, and other good discursive practices likely help but they take us only so far.
Is there a better way? Is it possible to develop a method that would facilitate productive, less biased discussions?
One approach holding that promise is argument mapping.
What is argument mapping?
Argument mapping is a method for facilitating discussions by representing it as a node-link diagram. The nodes of the graph correspond to claims and links between them show relationships between these claims. These relationships can take various forms, such as support, undermining, refutation, contradiction, etc.
Have a look at this argument map example. At the top you can see the root thesis—the main subject of discussion. Each tile on the map represents a claim, and the arrows between them show their relationships. Green arrows connect statements that support the thesis, while red arrows represent those that undermine it.
Mapping a discussion may seem like a lot of work but having right software makes it much easier and the benefits may be enormous.
Why use argument mapping?
Argument mapping can facilitate group discussions in many ways. It helps clarify arguments, identify areas of agreement and disagreement, reduce miscommunications, and promote informed decision-making.
By visualizing arguments in a clear format, argument mapping helps to keep discussions focused and avoid getting sidetracked by tangential issues. This leads to a more productive and efficient deliberation and decision-making process.
Argument mapping makes it easier to see the strengths and weaknesses of arguments, as well as helps to notice more subtle interactions between them. It clarifies the structure of discussions and lets everybody involved argue their case better and more productively. One sees which premises are crucial to the argument’s validity and which they should attempt to challenge to undermine the thesis.
Building a big web of interconnected arguments helps to notice unobvious relationships between them. For example, two arguments may support the same conclusion while being mutually exclusive. It is worth looking for the most relevant arguments, which would have the greatest impact on the final conclusion. We may also argue about the relationships between premises and conclusions themselves; whether A really supports or undermines B.
Argument mapping also makes it less likely to argue about the same thing over and over again, even though the topic has already been thoroughly discussed.
Regardless of whether they are used for conflict-resolution or informed decision-making, argument maps may turn out to be a helpful tool for any group discussion.
How to lead a discussion using argument mapping
If you would like to use argument mapping to facilitate a discussion, here is how you can go about this:
Identify the central issue to be discussed.
Provide claims that directly support or undermine this thesis (or connect to them in other ways).
Do the same for the arguments from point 2.
Repeat until you exhaust the topic.
The process is not always linear. Often, we go back and forth discussing topics at different levels or different areas of the argument map. Sometimes we can even discover that the initial root thesis is not really the crux of the matter at hand, and we find ourselves reformulating it or even coining a new one to make it the next center of the discussion.
So far, we described argument mapping-facilitated discussion as if it involved at least two people but, actually, nothing stops you from using it on your own - especially, if you are trying to gather and clarify your thoughts about an issue or make up your mind about it.
Even if argument mapping does not allow you to reach a definite conclusion each and every time, it is still likely to, at least, help you deliberate on a complex issue and identify crucial pieces of information.
