[platz]

Most argumentation we do as on questions that are worth debating aren't based purely on deductive reasoning, but more on informal reasoning and heuristics with limited evidence.

Toulmin identifies the three essential parts of any argument as

    - the claim
    - the data (also called grounds or evidence), which support the claim
    - the warrant.

The warrant is the assumption on which the claim and the evidence depend. Another way of saying this would be that the warrant explains why the data support the claim.

Toulmin says that the weakest part of any argument is its weakest warrant. Remember that the warrant is the link between the data and the claim. If the warrant isn’t valid, the argument collapses.

Example:

    Claim: You should buy our toothwhitening product.
    Data or Grounds: Studies show that teeth are 50% whiter after using the product for a specified time.
    Warrant: People want whiter teeth.

Notice that those commercials don’t usually bother trying to convince you that you want whiter teeth; instead, they assume that you have accepted the value our culture places on whiter teeth.

https://www.blinn.edu/writing-centers/pdfs/Toulmin-Argument....