This paper analyses argumentation in poetry from Stephen Toulmin’s theoretical perspective and other models in the field and focuses on six poems. The author contends that argumentation activates different forms of conceptual interaction which can be found in lyric discourse. He claims that argumentation can be found structuring the form of the poem or inside one of the fragments. Furthermore, the author makes a distinction between primary conceptual schematizations from everyday life (i.e., clichés, conceptual metaphors) and secondary schematizations belonging to poetic memory (i.e., topics, intertexts, metatexts…), and other ideological and cognitive dimensions that can be primary or secondary. It is proposed that because poems usually present argumental backgrounds, macro-arguments are implied.