Barrowman’s “Why Data Is Never Raw” and Toulmin’s Model
In “Why Data Is Never Raw” by Nick Barrowman, the idea that data are inherently objective is examined and scrutinized. Recently the phrase “the data show that…” has become a rhetorical crutch. Journalists and politicians alike have employed data (information collected for analysis) as factual support for their claims. This logic appears sound on the surface; however, in reality, data can be subjective. Grated data are not subjective in how they are statistically compared but in how data are collected. Barrowman states that
In order for decisions to be critically evaluated, their supporting values and assumptions must also be scrutinized. This is especially vital when it comes to political decision-making. Data or “data-based” policy is increasingly seen as a panacea when it comes to political decision-making. On this view, we now have an opportunity to replace the messiness of politics with the rational order of data. But the attention on data often only obscures the underlying values and assumptions—and the importance of exposing and subjecting them to critical scrutiny only grows. When values, preferences, and interests clash, politics is not only inevitable but essential. No algorithm can determine which decision is best; any such conclusion merely raises the question: By whose values is it the “best”?(Barrowman)
Barrowman claims that one should scrutinize data with the same skepticism as the argument is supported. Toulmin’s Model of an augment provides a means by which one can analyze data. In Toulmin’s Model, data and evidence are what support the argumentative claim. Toulmin also links data to the warrant of the argument by the grounds of the argument. In Toulmin’s Model, the grounds are the reason one should adhere to the claim. All one needs to evaluate the legitimacy of data is to examine the grounds or reasoning on which the argument is based.
So if part of an argument’s reasoning is that one should base one’s adherence to the claim solely on the, presumably, “incorruptible data,” then is that argument rhetorical or sophistic?
Click HERE for more information on Toulmin’s Model.
