# data[].attributes.body
This form of persuasive argumentation allows the author and reader to find a middle ground by analysing the context through the lens of reader's perspective before introducing the claims

# data[].attributes.headline
situation- debates on economic policy (Aditya)

# data[].attributes.subject
situation- debates on economic policy (Aditya)

# data[].attributes.body
1) Claim- Farm Laws are beneficial for economic progress of farming community
2) Grounds - private participation, fair market value
3) Warrant - data backed?
4) Backing  - other data of related or allied industry
5) Qualifier- issues that may cause things to backfire or not be accepted by larger community
6) Rebuttal- farmers protest and claims

# data[].attributes.body
1. Components :
a. The two opposing arguments.
b. The specific situations where they are valid.
c. Feedback from audience.
d. Editing.

2.  What follows what?
a. My argument.
b. The opposing argument.
c.  Evidence that the opposing argument is also valid during certain circumstances.
d. Evidence for my argument.
e. Conclusion.
f. Feedback
g. Editing.

3. Arguments about controversial topics.

# data[].attributes.body
This framework is great for constructing, analysing and approaching an argument
1) Claim
2) Grounds
3) Warrant
4) Backing
5) Qualifier
6) Rebuttal

# data[].attributes.body
1. Claims
2. Grounds
3. Warrants
4. Backing
5. Qualifier
6. Rebuttal

This type of argument works well when there are no clear truths or absolute solutions to a problem. Toulmin arguments take into account the complex nature of most situations.

# data[].attributes.body
Primary purpose of the Aristotelian argument is to persuade or convince the audience towards your side.

# data[].attributes.headline
1)  A common ground , Understanding the audience, Identification and introduction of the problem, acknowledgment of the counter argument, stating the position, bring the two sides and conclude. This is followed by editing and feedback. 

# data[].attributes.subject
1)  A common ground , Understanding the audience, Identification and introduction of the problem, acknowledgment of the counter argument, stating the position, bring the two sides and conclude. This is followed by editing and feedback. 

# data[].attributes.body
3) This style is typically visible in academic essays where the readers are also in demand of proper sources backing the argument.

# data[].attributes.body
This is used to find a common ground with the audience. Here, immediately after introducing one's own opinion/stand on an issue, the opposing view is also acknowledged. Then, the author elaborates on their own opinion. The essay or write-up ends in a balanced view where the author tries to convince the opposition about why at least some aspects of the argument stated is worth accepting.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Introduction.
2. Acknowledging the other side.
3. Present your side.
4. Bring the two sides together.
5.  Remind your audience of the balanced perspective

When your audience is a really difficult one in the sense that you know your audience isn’t going to completely agree with your side of the issue, it can be a good idea to try to find a middle ground. The Rogerian argument finds that middle ground.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Ethos, Pathos, Logos to convince the audience
2. Ethos (thorough research for credibility, Pathos (appeal to the audience through your arguments), Logos (Logical arguments and conclusions to convince the audience)
3. Presenting the claim, evidence, and conclusion for each argument that is introduced. Example: Canagarajah talking about inference, correlationist and negotiation models

# data[].attributes.headline
1. What are the component parts of this argumentation style?

# data[].attributes.subject
1. What are the component parts of this argumentation style?

# data[].attributes.headline
3. What kind of situation demands this kind of argumentation?

# data[].attributes.subject
3. What kind of situation demands this kind of argumentation?