Joel Best, Social Problems

和訳して／

A third ingredient in the basic recipe that establishes the grounds for many claims is some sort of statistic, a number that suggests the scope of the problem. In our child abuse example, we might be told that authorities receive nearly three million reports of

suspected child abuse annually. In contemporary American culture, statistics imply accuracy and precision--that someone must have counted something. In practice, this is not necessarily true. When claimsmakers are first trying to draw attention to a social problem,

they often argue that this problem has been neglected or overlooked. But if people have been ignoring a particular social condition, they probably haven't been carefully measuring its extent, which means no one has been keeping accurate statistics. As a result, early claims often feature figures that are ballpark estimates or educated guesses (J. Best,

2013). And just as claimsmakers favor dramatic typifying examples, they usually prefer big numbers, statistics that suggest that the problem is widespread, because a big number implies there is a big problem. Particularly at the beginning of the social problems process, claims often feature big numbers that are really little more than rough estimates.

和訳して／

The three ingredients in the basic rhetorical recipe--a disturbing typifying example, a name, and a big number--combine to create a troubling impression. For example, a description of a small child being beaten to death, coupled with both an explanation that this death is just one instance of the larger problem of child abuse and a statement that three million cases of suspected abuse are reported each year, conveys a sense that millions of children are

in danger--possibly of losing their lives. This basic recipe offers a quick, compelling case for recognizing a new social problem. It is an effective rhetorical formula, one that can be spotted in many social problems claims (see Box 2.1). 

和訳して

Additional Grounds:

Claims often feature grounds beyond the recipe’s three ingredients.　Ⅿany different rhetorical devices can appear as grounds in social problems claims; what follows is just a sampling.

和訳してください／

Worsening situation. 

Very often, claims insist that the problem is getting worse. Words like epidemic and crime wave convey a sense of urgency: the problem is spreading, and--unless something is done--it may soon spiral out of control.

和訳して／Kinds of people involved:

　Most claims identify categories of people involved in the troubling condition, and explain how their involvement should be understood (Loseke, 2003). Among

the most common person categories are victims (those harmed by the problem, who may be characterized as bearing no responsibility for their plight, and therefore meriting society's support and sympathy) and villains (those responsible for the problem, usually depicted as deserving blame and punishment). Typifying examples often illustrate the principal categories of people involved in the troubling condition (such as an innocent, abused child and an abusive parent).

和訳して／

 Familiar type of problem. 

Claims often categorize a problem as being of a recognizable type, such as a crime or a disease. These types are characterized by familiar patterns: we think of crime as being perpetrated by a criminal who intentionally preys on an innocent victim, and diseases as striking vulnerable individuals who should not be considered responsible for getting sick. When a claim classifies the new problem as belonging to a particular type, the claim's audience immediately has a sense of how to think about the problem.

和訳して。

Range of people affected. 

Another popular ground for claims is the suggestion that the problem affects a broad range of people--rich and poor, white and black, and so on. Sometimes it is argued that the problem strikes "randomly" (J. Best, 1999). Of course, if a problem strikes at random, then it might affect anyone, including anyone listening to the claim. Such randomness suggests that each person who hears the claim has a personal interest in doing something to deal with the problem--before it affects him or her.

和訳して／

Challenge to older interpretations: Claims also may challenge existing or alternative interpretations of the social problem. For instance, students who don't do well in school traditionally were held responsible for their poor performance, which was attributed to their inattention, lack of discipline or effort, and so on.　But recent decades have featured claims about learning disabilities, arguing that many  students should not be blamed because their poor performance is due to biologically based learning disabilities that deserve accommodation (Conrad, 2007). Such claims challenge older, more familiar constructions. These challenges may be quite explicit; claims may list-and debunk--what they describe as "myths," widely held beliefs about the problem that the claim dismisses as wrong. For example, claims that seek to reconstruct the problem of rape criticize "rape myths" for distorting people's thinking about that crime (Suarez & Gadalla,2010).

 Again, these are just a few of the many kinds of grounds statements found in claims. Taken together, a claim's grounds give a sense of the problem--its nature, scope, and future prospects. Effective grounds convince listeners that the condition is real, thereby setting the stage for the claim's warrants.