Homework for you

As Critical Thinking Argument Elements

Rating: 4.4/5.0 (16 Votes)

Category: Critical thinking

Description

Critical Thinking: Argument Elements


An argument has to have a conclusion with at least one supporting reason.


Reason:
A cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event.


Evidence:
Something that supports a reason; this usually can be seen in the form of statistics.


Examples:
Something which is used as evidence to illustrate a principle.


Claim:
A statement or judgement that can be challenged.


Counter Argument:
An argument made that is against the conclusion.


Counter Assertion:
When a reason is presented that supports an opponent's argument.


Hypothetical Reasoning:
A claim in the form "If this. then that. ". if something happens it will cause something else to happen.


Assumption:
A missing reason in the argument. An assumption is essential for the conclusion to be drawn.

2 comments:

Time is one of the most precious and expensive thing in this world so value your time wisely because you can't flashback every wasted time at the past. Time is gold. Visit my site for more information.

Life is like a battle, if you don't know how to defend yourself then you'll end up being a loser. So, better take any challenges as your stepping stone to become a better person. Have fun, explore and make a lot of memories.

Other articles

UK Learning College - Distance Learning and Online Courses

UK Learning College CONTACT info@findcourses.co.uk FOR MORE INFORMATION. UK Learning College - Distance Learning Courses, Online Training and Qualifications

UK Learning College offers dedicated online training solutions in a wide range of study areas, from business and management to HR, professional IT, Healthcare, Hospitality and leisure courses. UK Learning College provides a strong professional base, dedicated tutorial support, and a wide range of student support services. The training staff at UKLC inspires, motivates and supports all candidates enrolled, who become a part of the vibrant UKLC virtual campus.

Why choose UK Learning College?
  • Study in the most diverse, global and innovative environment using cutting-edge technology
  • Various distance learning options on a unique learning portal that meets all your learning needs
  • Becoming part of a global online learning community where you can communicate with instructors, mentors, advisors and fellow students.
  • Personalised training approach: throughout your study with UKLC you will be closely monitored and supported by a dedicated academic team
Training Approaches

The mission of UKLC is to make learning as accessible as possible, by enabling busy professional to get the skills, training and education they want, in a completely flexible way. By enrolling in a course with UKLC, students will be closely assisted to gain the confidence to perform at their best in their knowledge area. The best to achieve this is through a personalised learning experience and by ensuring they have the right level of support and quality content to empower them to achieve success. UK Learning College offers courses and qualification training in:

  • Business and Leadership
  • Human Resources
  • Office Management
  • Accounting and Finance
  • Professional IT training
  • Hospitality and Tourism
  • Healthcare
Professional training solutions designed by the experts

All of the courses delivered by UKLC are all taught via supported home learning. so that students have the freedom to learn anytime at any place, knowing that a dedicated tutor is always available to offer guidance. The latest available and most varied methods are used throughout the course delivery, in a variety of formats that suit individual learning styles.

Contact information for UK Learning College

AS Critical Thinking, More Sophisticated Argument Elements - Presentation in A Level and IB Critical Thinking

AS Critical Thinking, More Sophisticated Argument Elements

An Intermediate Conclusion
Definition: a conclusion drawn on the way to the
stronger and most important conclusion (the Main
Conclusion). It acts as a Reason for the Main
Conclusion and is itself supported by Reasons
E.g. (R1) Very cold winters lead to high numbers of elderly people needing to be
admitted to hospital. (R2) We are expecting a very cold winter. (IC) So we should expect
high numbers of elderly people needing to be admitted to hospital. (MC) Therefore we
will need to ensure that we have enough hospital beds to met demand.
We can tell the main conclusion and the intermediate conclusion from the indicator
words ­ `so' and `therefore'. We can also tell which conclusion is the main one as it is the
strongest - the other conclusion acts as support for it.…read more

How do you spot an Intermediate
Conclusion from a Main Conclusion?
There are 3 steps:
1) Identify all the conclusions present by looking for
indicator words e.g. therefore, hence,
consequently, should, this.
2) Next, decide which statement supports the
other. The intermediate conclusion will act as a
reason for the main conclusion
3) Check that the argument will not work the other
way round ­ if you swap around the
Intermediate Conclusion with the Main
Conclusion it wont make sense…read more

Spot the Intermediate Conclusion:
Using the 3 steps, try and find the Reason(s), Intermediate Conclusion and
Main Conclusion in this passage:
"John wants to audition for a local rock band. He
plays guitar but is also a good drummer. The
band play gigs all over the city and therefore
John would need a car to transport his drum kit
around with him to gigs. John does not have
enough money to buy a car and consequently it
would be better if he auditioned on guitar."…read more

Answer:
" (R1) John wants to audition for a local rock
band. (R2) He plays guitar but is also a good
drummer. (R3) The band play gigs all over the
city and therefore (IC) John would need a car to
transport his drum kit around with him to gigs.
(R4) John does not have enough money to buy a
car and consequently (MC) it would be better if
he auditioned on guitar."…read more

A Counter Argument
Definition: A Counter Argument within a passage
pays brief reference to an opposing viewpoint via a
Counter Conclusion and brief Counter Reason.
The author will then dismiss the Counter Argument
using Reasons and the Main Conclusion.
Indicator words: some people
say/claim/think/argue, it has been suggested,
although, despite, however, initially…read more

Elements of Reasoning (Critical Thinking) Chapters 1, 2, and 3

Elements of Reasoning (Critical Thinking) Chapters 1, 2, and 3. Transcript of Elements of Reasoning (Critical Thinking) Chapters 1, 2, and 3.

What the Hell is an Argument, Anyways?
Contrary to popular use of the term, an 'argument' is
not
a shouting match between two or more people. Rather,
an argument is a set of claims, one of which (the conclusion) is meant to be supported by the others (the premises).

A claim is any statement that is truth-functional, i.e, is true or false.

Each of the following statements is a claim:

"In the year 3000 robotic beings rule the world."

"Spider-Man would beat Batman in a fight."

"There is an odd number of giraffes on the planet at this very moment."

"San Francisco is in California."
What is a claim?
A conclusion is a claim that is being supported by reasons in an argument.
What is a conclusion?
What is a premise?
A premise is a claim that is intended to act as a reason in an argument, meaning that it is intended to support a conclusion.
Simple Argument Examples:
Duchamp's Fountain is considered an important work of modern art. The thing is nothing you can't find in any men's room. Modern art is garbage!

It's clear that killing a human being is wrong. It's also clear that a fetus is a human being. So, clearly then, killing a fetus is wrong; abortion is murder.

Each of the above arguments is
simple
because each contains only one
inference
and only one
conclusion.
An inference is a psychological move that a person makes from accepting one or more premises to accepting a conclusion.

Implication is a purely logical relation between claims.

The claim, "Today is Tuesday," implies that yesterday was Monday even if a person incorrectly infers that yesterday was a day other than Monday.
Inference versus Implication
Duchamp's Fountain is considered an important work of modern art. The thing is nothing you can't find in any men's room. Modern art is garbage! Since our modern art is garbage, we can be assured that our culture as a whole has taken a dive since the 18th century.

It's clear that killing a human being is wrong. It's also clear that a fetus is a human being. So, clearly then, killing a fetus is wrong; abortion is murder. Given that abortion is murder, Stephanie ought to be locked up for having one performed.

Each of the arguments above is
complex
because each contains more than one
inference
and
conclusion.
Complex Argument Examples:
In general, these are not considered a part of a person's argument, even if they are intended to be. This is because, in general, they are not truth-functional. A question, for example, is not true or false. It's just a request.

Of course, this is not a hard and fast rule: sometimes a grammatical question is used to express a claim and likewise for commands, exhortations,
and exclamations.
Questions, exhortations, commands, and exclamations:
"Is he willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?"

This argument contains questions, but they can easily be recast as conditional statements.
Hume's Argument From Evil:
An intermediate conclusion is a
claim that is supported by one or more claims but also provides support for another claim itself.

The final conclusion is
the main claim that an argument is intended to support, it provides no support for other claims in the argument.

It's clear that killing a human being is wrong. It's also clear that a fetus is a human being. So, clearly then, killing a fetus is wrong; abortion is murder. Given that abortion is murder, Stephanie ought to be locked up for having one performed.
Intermediate and Final Conclusions:
An enthymeme is an incomplete argument; one or more of it's premises or it's conclusion is unstated.

Example: Duchamp's Fountain deliberately leads us to see an ordinary object in a new and interesting way. Thus, it is rightly considered as a genuine work of art.

What's missing?
Enthymemes:
When we notice that an argument has an unstated claim we need to supply one (or else we can't evaluate it). How do we determine what the claim ought to be? Some guidelines:

Choose a claim that is (a) plausible, (b) fits best with the author's intent, and (c) makes the argument as strong as possible. Failing to do any of these will result in a straw man fallacy.

tl;dr be charitable.
Unstated Claims
Often, when an argument is incomplete, what is unstated is what the author of the argument takes for granted.

What are the unstated claims in the following campaign ad?
Unstated Claims
I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm a Christian, but you don't need to be in the pew every Sunday to know there's something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military but our kids can't openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school.
As President, I'll end Obama's war on religion. And I'll fight against liberal attacks on our religious heritage.
Faith made America strong. It can make her strong again.
I'm Rick Perry and I approve this message.
"Strong"
". gays can serve openly in the military. "

". our kids can't openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school."
--------------------------------------------------------------
". there's something wrong in this country. "

"If gays can serve openly in the military and/or kids can't openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school, then there's something wrong in this country."
Unstated Claim:
Sometimes it's hard to tell apart an argument from an explanation. There is a useful rule of thumb, though.

Arguments include claims (the premises) that are intended to provide support for another claim (the conclusion), and thus give us more reason to believe that claim (the conclusion).

Explanations, on the other hand, assume that some claim is true (the explanandum) and then attempt to show how or why it is true using other claims (the explanans).
Explanation versus Argument
The animals raised on factory farms—the overwhelming majority of those we eat—are badly treated at every stage of the process that brings them to our tables. Raised in crowded, filthy facilities, they are genetically manipulated and dosed with growth hormones to rush them quickly to market and make room for their replacements. They are heavily dosed with drugs to stave off illness spawned by crowding and filth. Confined in tiny spaces, without the chance to move freely or turn around, unable to establish natural social relations among themselves, with little or no access to fresh air, sunlight or open spaces, they are crammed in with thousands of others, equally unfortunate. Then they are transported, without food or water, sometimes for hundreds of miles in extremes of heat and cold, to slaughterhouses, where their short, miserable lives end with unspeakable cruelty.
Argument or Explanation?
Alone or in a group of up to three, complete exercises 4, 6, 18, and 20 (A; p. 10).

You only need one sheet per group.

Make sure to include everyone's name.

If you need help, just ask!
Exercises:
In your same group as before, complete exercises 6, 14, and 18 (B; p. 13).

You only need one sheet per group.

Make sure to include everyone's name.

If you need help, just ask!

When you are finished, you may turn them in.
Exercises:
You are now in a position to appreciate this comedic gem.
Monty Python's Argument Clinic
Bruce Wayne is The Batman!
Argument:
Explanation:
Bruce is never around when The Batman shows up.

Bruce spends all his money on capes and ninja stars.

Bruce is the only person who knows how to fight like The Batman.

Bruce has a vendetta against the criminals of Gotham.
Why: Having witnessed the murder of his parents as a child, Bruce swore revenge on criminals, an oath tempered with the greater ideal of justice.

How: Bruce is the head of Wayne Industries, which affords him unparallelled access to high-tech weaponry and also billions of dollars to purchase it. He is also highly trained in martial arts.
Alone or in groups of up to three, complete exercises 4, 6, 12, 14, and 20 (A; p. 24).

You only need one sheet per group.

Make sure to include everyone's name.

If you need help, just ask!
Exercises:
And now for something completely different:
Once we have identified the relevant claims in an argument (the premise(s) and the conclusion(s)), we'll want to make it pretty. I mean manageable. This seems pointless now, but later on when we start to transcribe sentences into sentential logic it will pull its weight.

To put an argument into standard form, we order the premises in a way that makes sense, number them, stack them up, draw a line underneath, and then insert the conclusion.
Standard Form:
Take the following argument:

"I think we're going to have a fearsome fighting team on our hands in about 13 years because, like I said, if any turtle comes into contact with TGRI's Ooze, they'll learn to fight like ninjas--which is awesome, by the way. Anyways look, those four turtles are swimming around in the stuff! This worries me!"
Sample Argument:
". we're going to have a fearsome fighting team on our hands in about 13 years. "

". because. if any turtle comes into contact with TGRI's Ooze, they'll become such a team."

". those four turtles are swimming around in the stuff!"
Step 2: Separate Claims
". because, like I said, if any turtle comes into contact with TGRI's Ooze, they'll become such a team."

"And look, those four turtles are swimming around in the stuff!"

"I think we're going to have a fearsome fighting team on our hands in about 13 years. "
Step 3: Reorder Claims
If any turtles come into contact with TGRI's Ooze, they'll become a fearsome fighting team.

Those four turtles are in contact with TGRI's Ooze.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Those four turtles are going to become a fearsome fighting team.
Step 4: Reformulate Claims
COWABUNGA!
When we represent complex arguments in standard form, we follow the same pattern except that we do not draw a line before the intermediate conclusion(s).

"
I think
we're going to have a fearsome fighting team on our hands in about 13 years because,
like I said
, if any turtle comes into contact with TGRI's Ooze, they'll learn to fight like ninjas--
which is awesome, by the way
.
Anyways look
, those four turtles are swimming around in the stuff!
This worries me!
"
Step 1: Remove Irrelevant Elements
In your same groups as before, complete exercises 6, 12, 16, and 20 (B; pp.25-27).

You only need one sheet per group.

Make sure to include everyone's name.

If you need help, just ask!

When you are finished, you may turn them in.
Exercises:
Whether an argument is successful or not is a function of two things:

(1) The truth of it's premises.
(2) The degree of support that those premises provide for it's conclusion.

In this class, we are going to examine (2) only.
Evaluating Arguments:
An argument can be intended to provide support for it's conclusion in one of two ways.

(2a) An argument can be intended to provide
conclusive

support
for it's conclusion.
(2b) An argument can be intended to provide a
high degree

of support
for it's conclusion.
Two Kinds of Support:
The two ways that an argument can provide support for a conclusion divides arguments into two types:

Arguments that are intended to provide conclusive support are called
deductive arguments
.

Arguments that are intended to provide a high degree of suport are called
nondeductive

arguments
.
Two Kinds of Argument:
Deductive arguments are meant to provide conclusive support for a conclusion. When they succeed, they are called
valid
. When they do not, they are called
invalid
.

Validity or invalidity, then, applies to the
structure
of a deductive argument; to the way that it's premises are connected to it's conclusion.
The Concept of Validity:
Colloqually, we use the term 'valid' to mean something like 'applicable,' for instance when we say 'that is a valid question.'

Like the term 'argument,' however, we are going to use 'valid' in a very specific way and only in this way.

Valid Argument
: an argument in which there is no possible way for all of the premises to be true and the conclusion false at the same time.
Validity:
When an argument is valid, IF all of the premises are true, THEN the conclusion must be true, is necessarily true, is guaranteed to be true. Valid arguments are
truth-preserving
; they hold on to the truth of their premises.

Because valid arguments are truth-preserving, you could literally bet your life that the conclusion of a valid argument is a true one, given that all of the premises are true.
Validity:
Valid, Invalid, or Neither?
My mother became well after I prayed for her health, she said she felt the Holy Spirit healing her, and the doctors say that her recovery was miraculous. So I know that God healed her.
Only those who have HIV can contract AIDS. Harold doesn't have HIV, so Harold cannot contract AIDS.
We're going to go over deductive arguments first before moving on to nondeductive arguments.

Central to understanding the difference is the concept of
validity
.
Two Kinds of Argument:
For an argument to be valid, the conclusion must follow by necessity from the premises.

Validity is a matter of structure; it has nothing at all to do with the
truth
of the premises.

You need to build a mental wall between the concepts of truth and validity.
Validity, Truth, and Soundness:
A helpful way to determine whether an argument is valid is to assume that all of the premises are true and then check whether the conclusion follows by necessity. Ignoring the truth of the premises allows you to focus on the structure of the argument.

Another helpful way is to tell a story (conduct a thought experiment) in which the premises all hold (are true) but the conclusion is false. If you can do this, the argument is not valid.
Hints:
P1) Birds are robots.
P2) Every robot animal descended from dinosaurs.
-----------------------------------------------
C) Therefore, birds descended from dinosaurs.
False Premises and a True Conclusion:
P1) Birds are mammals.
P2) Every mammal descended from octopi.
--------------------------------------------------
C) Birds descended from octopi.
False Premises and a False Conclusion:
P1) Birds are descended from dinosaurs.
P2) Anything descended from dinosaurs is a dinosaur.
----------------------------------------------------------------
C) Birds are (avian) dinosaurs.
True Premises and a True Conclusion:
An argument like the last one, a valid argument with true premises, is called a
sound

This is not a different kind of argument. Noting an argument as 'sound' is like giving it a thumbs up.
Sound Arguments:
Valid
Valid
Valid
Alone or in a group of up to three, complete exercises 4, 12, 16, 18, and 20. (A; pp. 33-34).

You only need one sheet per group.

Make sure to include everyone's name.

If you need help, just ask!
Exercises:
Two characteristics:

First, nondeductive arguments are not meant to be valid but are meant to make their conclusions
more

probable
. Those that do are '
nondeductively successful
.'

Second, unlike validity, the support that a nondeductive argument provides its conclusion is
graded
(comes in various degrees)
Nondeductive Arguments:
P1)
Most people
who watch FOX News are conservatives.
P2) My grandpa watches FOX News.
-------------------------------------------
C) So,
my grandpa
is probably a conservative.

In a statistical syllogism, we make an inference from some fact about a population to a claim about some member of that population.
From the population to a particular
.
Statistical Syllogism:
P1)
97% of the climate scientists we surveyed
agree that human activity has an appreciable affect on the earth's climate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
C) So,
97% of ALL climate scientists
agree that human activity has an appreciable affect on the earth's climate.

In an inductive generalization, we make an inference from facts about some sample of the population to a claim about the whole population; we move beyond our observations.
From particulars to a population
.
Inductive Generalization:
In your same group as before, complete exercises 6, 14, 18, and 20 (B; pp. 42-44).

You only need one sheet per group.

Make sure to include everyone's name.

If you need help, just ask!

When you are finished, you may turn them in.
Exercises:
P1) If pigs fly, then Lady Gaga was Darth Vader in a past life.
P2) Pigs most certainly fly.
----------------------------------------------------------------
C) Thus, Lady Gaga was Darth Vader in a past life.
What about this one?
P1) My mother became well after I prayed for her health.
P2) She said she felt the Holy Spirit healing her.
P3) The doctors say that her recovery was miraculous.
P4) My sister had a dream the night before that our mother would recover.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
C) So God probably healed her.

The premises of a plausibility argument are intended to collectively make the conclusion plausible only. There are no real rules for this type of argument, and no clear way to evaluate it. This type of argument, however, is very common.
Plausibility Arguments
I knew that if my hypothesis were correct, then we would observe gravitational lensing during the solar eclipse. When I saw the lensing, I knew my hypothesis was correct.

More presentations by Nick Alvarez