By *good* I mean well-formed arguments, as aMap is structured around a 3-tiered informal logic structure:

- Proposition

- Argument (or secondary proposition)

- Fact / Evidence

Check out the 4000th argument here:

You probably didn’t know it, but all everyday arguments are based around this structure.  Whether you’re arguing with your wife about or the parking warden, you’ll be using *informal logic*.

Anyway, that’s getting away from the point of this post – i.e. celebrating aMap’s growing popularity!

aMap’s proved particularly popular in the education space – amongst teachers who focus on teaching critical thinking or debate.

As an ex-Philosophy student, the power of logic is undeniably one of the most important skills in life to master – something that Aristotle would certainly agree with.

Anyway, if you haven’t already – create an aMap and have an argument with someone.

++ if you seen them already, check out our selection of pre-packaged pocket arguments – which you can buy in case you need an emergency argument ; – )

My three favorites from this month are:

Miguel from Denver, with the hot US subject of “alcohol drinking age”

Mazzoni from Sydney, with the subject “who’s the US’s most influential President”

Tegan from Werribee, with the subject “Should there be ratings on movies?”

So – here are my top 3 of the month so far:

(of course, than you to everyone to arguing to date – we appreciate all your arguments!)

How was the world created?

Large cities or small towns?

Is coal worse for the environment than natural gas?

So there you go – they’re my top 3 picks for the month.  I look forward to arguments in October!

Check out the shop and argument in situ below!

The Monty Python Clinic sketch is truly hysterical – so give it a watch!

So I’ve collated a whole selection of clips on the debate of whether cats are better than dogs.

If you’re interested in this debate, then you’ll LOVE our fun “pocket argument guide” on the subject – title “Cat or Dog?”. Check it out here (click!) – it’s super cool!

Or else you can check out the Cat or Dog debate below . . .

Cats or Dogs from Argumental!

Cats or dogs debate clip

Cats or dogs debate

Are cats better than dogs?

And remember, if you’re interested in this debate, then you’ll LOVE our fun “pocket argument guide” on the subject – title “Cat or Dog?”. Check it out here (click!) – it’s super cool!

Other tips include, checking out my father’s site for the best monitored alarm systems in the UK – monitored alarms being those that immediately link and connect you to the police via the telephone.

Many commentators are now questionning the Cameron’s wisdom in goading Gordon into having a live debate, and think that the Conservatives have more to lose than Brown has to win.

And I’d agree – especially if you analyse the skills of both debaters using Aristotle’s rhetoric:

- Brown is strong on Ethos and Logos.  He carries Ethos due to the gravitas of his economic wisdom and greying hair.  His Logos comes from years of crafting arguments in the Commons debating Chamber.

- Cameron strong on Logos, and brings some Pathos, but is weak on Ethos.  His Pathos comes from a connection with a certain audience – i.e. the middle classes – however, this isn’t particularly strong.  And he’s certainly weak on Ethos.  His baby-face, and evident lack of experience doesn’t go down well at all with a large tranche of voters.

So on the face of it, when analysing the skills of each debater, I’d say Brown has the upper-hand – and is likely to win.  Unless, that is, Cameron greys up a little, and suddenly finds 20 years of life experience.