Key terms are the problematic cores of all arguments, and some of these problematic tensions cannot be resolved by simply consulting a dictionary. This may seem like an abstract problem; however, these contested terms often have significant political consequences in the real world.

Aristotle tackles the problem of definition by placing terms within categories, then showing the special, distinct attributes that set them apart from other terms in those categories. There are necessary criteria, or attributes of the term that must be present in order for the term to be correctly placed within a category. There are also issues of sufficient criteria; in other words, does the term possess enough of these necessary attributes to make it a good example of its category?

Of course, rhetorical context profoundly affects our notions of definition. For instance, "free speech" means one thing in a private, religious grade school newspaper, another on a widely distributed rap album. Each context has its own laws governing what's appropriate, and to a large extent, what's possible within that context.

There are also operational definitions, which may be measured empirically. These are often manifested in exams; for instance, tests measuring driving proficiency often state that someone may be defined as a "safe driver" if they can correctly answer more than 75% of test questions on driving laws and regulations.

In defining contested terms, you may use a reportive or stipulative strategy.
a)reportive: cites how others use the term
b)stipulative: cites how you define the term

Most definition arguments use a criteria match structure, fashioned after the ideas developed by Aristotle. When conducting the match part, be sure to supply examples and other evidence showing that your contested case does or does not meet the criteria you establish in your definition.

For tips on how to organize your definition argument, see the sample outline on p. 214.

back