Think Again: How to Reason and Argue

Complete course slides

How to Spot an Argument

Week 1

Lecture List

1-1: Why Arguments Matter1-2: What is an Argument?1-3: What Arguments are Used For - Justification

1-4: What Else Are Arguments Used For - Explanation

1-5: What Are Arguments Made Of - Language1-6: Meaning1-7: Linguistic Acts1-8: Speech Acts1-9: Conversation Acts

This Course

- Will address practical issues and theoretical questions.

- We will focus on reason

- Approach arguments by way of reason

-Learn to spot and avoid bad arguments

What We Will Learn

1. How to Analyze Arguments

2. How to evaluate Deductive Arguments

3. How to evaluate Inductive Arguments

4. How to avoid Fallacies

What arguments are not

- Arguments are not fights.

- You cannot win an argument by abuse

- Complaints

Definition of Argument

(a) A series of sentences, statements, or propositions

(b) where some are the premises

(c) and one is the conclustion

(d) Where the premises are intended to give a reason for the conclusion

Purpose for Arguments

Persuading - making people believe or do something that they would not otherwise believe or do

- Tries to convince, reasons may be good or bad

Justifying - showing someone a reason to believe a conclusion

- Tries to give good reasons

Questions to Ask

1. Is the arguer trying to change someone's mind?

-If so, the purpose is persuasion

2. Is the arguer trying to give some kind of reason to believe something?

-If so, the purpose is justification

Arguments sometimes Explain

Explaining IS An attempt to fit a particular phenomenon int a general pattern in order to increase understanding and remove bewilderment or surprise.

Explanation is NOT: Persuasion, justification, generalization, or prediction

Kinds of explanations

1. Causal - why something happened

2. Teleological - the purpose or goal of something

3. Formal - the form of something as an explanation

4. Material - what something is made out of

Explanation in Standard Form

General principles or lawsInitial conditions _

.'. Phenomenon to be explained

Language Is

1. Important - Without language it would be difficult to

communicate

2. Conventional - We use language in certain patterns

and in certain ways to convey the same idea

3. Representational - We assign words to objects and

it becomes a convention, suddenly changing the name of the object does not change its nature

4. Social - Language is shared and that is why we follow

conventions

Language Operates Under Rules:

Semantics: meanings of words

Physical Production: volume, pronunciation, and so

on

Structural Combination: spelling and grammar

Etiquette

Meaning of Language

Meaning is use.

-The meaning of the language is given by the way those words are used in normal situations by competent speakers of the language.

- Use is diverse.

Levels of Language

1. Linguistic

2. Speech Acts

3. Conversational

Linguistic Act:

The production of a meaningful utterance.Ex: It's easy!

-You have to use words-The words have to make sense-It has to be ordered correctly and grammatically correct

Garden Path Sentences: do not seem correct at first, but if it is separated correctly it is a sentence

Speech Acts

- "You're nothing 'til you say so because it's the saying so that makes you so. "

-To test if it is a speech act, perform the "thereby test"

- Arguing is a speech act.

The Thereby Test

If I say, "I ___" in the appropriate circumstances then I thereby ___.-when you can fill in the blank with a verb and the verb makes sense, then the verb names a speech act

Ex: If I say, "I apologize," I thereby apologize.

Formula takes you from Words ---> to World

-Only applies in proper circumstances. Ex: you cannot walk up to

two strangers and pronounce them husband and wife

Conversational Acts

Is the bringing about of the intended effect, which is the standard effect for the kind of speech act that the speaker is performing.

-The conversational act does not occurwhen the effect does not occur.

-Conversational act rules are conversational maxims.

Conversational Maxims

Quantity: Don't say too much or too little

Quality: Don't say what you don't believe or what you have no reason to believe.

Relevance: Be relevant

Manner: Be brief. Be orderly. Avoid obscurity. Avoid ambiguity.

How to Untangle an Argument

Week 2

Lecture List2-1: Argument Markers2-2: Standard Form2-3: A Problem for Arguments2-4: Assuring2-5: Guarding2-6: Discounting2-7: Evaluation2-8: Close Analysis2-9: More Close Analysis2-10: Even More Close Analysis

Argument MakersThe language of arguments

I am tall, and I am good at sports. = I am good at sports, and I am good at sports.

I am tall, so I am good at sports. =/= I am good at sports, so I am tall.

Conclusion Markers

-Indicate that the sentence right after them is a conclusion.

● Therefore● Thus● Hence● Accordingly● So (though it is not always)

Premise (or Reason) Markers

- Indicate is that the sentence after them is a reason, or a premise, NOT a conclusion.

● Because● For ● As● For the reason that● And the reason why● Since (though it is not always)

Standard form

- The word order does not always tell us the order of an argument.

(1) Premise(1) Premis

-------------------.'. (3) Conclusion

The problem of the skeptical regress

Ways around

1. Start with a premise that is unjustified2. Have an argument with a circular structure3. Use an infinite chain of arguments

1. Unjustified Premise

- If your argument just guesses at the premise it cannot justify you in believing the conclusion

- If you start with an unjustified premise you can "prove" anything, even things that are obviously false

2. Circular structure

EX: There is life on Mars, therefore, there is life on Mars.

- If you are not justified in believing the argument, you are not justified in beliving the conclusion.

-The same argument can be used either way and is therefore invalid(ther is life or there is no life on mars)

3. Infinite chain of arguments

Ex: There are at least three bacteria on mars, therefore there are at least two bacteria on Mars, therefore there is life on Mars.

- And infinite chain of arguments would allow you to "prove" the conclusion even if the premise has no independent justification

Argument Moves

-Tricks for Dealing with Skeptical Regress

1. Assure the audience(Cite an authority, find shared assumptions)

2. Discount objections3. Guard your claim(It is probably right, rather than definitely)

Types of Assurances

1. Authoritative - cites an authority that the audience shares as an authority

1. Reflexive - citing yourself

1. Abusive - - conditional abuse - abuse anyone who

disagrees with them, so their abuse will apply to you if you disagree with them (Ex: You'd have to be stupid to disagree about this)

-appeal to common sense

Benefits of Assurances

1. They save you time

2. They help you avoid the skeptical regress

Tricks with Assurances

1. Citations of untrustworthy authorities2. Distractions

- "Thats obvious"- "It's certain"- "I'm sure"

3. Dropping assurances-"He says" transfers into "There are"

We Want an Assurance When

1. Somebody might question it2. The audience accepts the authority3. It would be too much trouble to cite all of the evidence

Assurances Are not Appropriate When

1. Nobody would question the claim

2. Authority is not trustworthy

3. You are easily able to give full explanation

Guarding

- Involves making your premises weaker so that it is harder to object to them.

Three Ways to Guard

1. Extent -(All > Most >some)

2. Probability -(Certain > Likely > Might have)

3. Mental(Know > Believe > Inclined to believe)

When someone is guarding, ask:

1. Why did they put in the guard?

2. Have they weakened the premise so much that the conclusion no longer follows?

Discounting

- Citing a possible criticism in order to reject it or counter it(Ex: Well the ring is expensive, but it is beautiful)

- "But" indicates the sentence after is more important than the one before

Other discounting words:-Although, Even if, Still, Nevertheless, Nonetheless, Whereas, Even though, However

Functions of Discounting Terms

1. They assert two claims

2. They contrast two claims

3. They emphasize one of the claims

Tricks of Discounting

1. Trick of Discounting Straw People - The arguer discounts easy objections to make people overlook the more difficult objections

2.Arguers can combine the trick of Discounting Straw People with misuses of guarding (like "all

rather than "most) and assuring

RULE of Thumb

Think about the objections that the arguer is NOT considering.

EvaluationEvaluative language - positive or negative language that judges the worth of something

Yay, Duke! =/= Duke is a good team.

Two Tricks

1. When we call something "good," we don't specify what the standards are. - This makes our claim more defensible since our standards cannot be questioned if they are not presented.

2. Agreeing to premises without specifing the "why" so everyone can use their own standards.

Levels of Evaluation

1. General - Good or bad, Should or should not, Right or

wrong, etc.

2. Specific - Beautiful or ugly, Cruel or kind, Cowardly or

Brave (can only apply to a small range of things, A soldier can be brave or cowardly, a chair cannot)

Why are these words evaluative?

What makes them evaluative is their connection to what is good or bad.

We will call language "evaluative" only when it is only and literally evaluative.

-Tricky examples: combining positive and negative evaluative words(+)Good = Good(+)(+)Pretty (+)good = less than good (-)(+)Pretty (-)Darn (+) Good = surprisingly good (+)

Slanting

- using evaluative terms without having reasons to do so

Slanting signals weaknesses in the arguments.

Close Analysis

- To go through an argument and mark the argument markers and terms in order to analyze the argument

Practice! Practice! Practice!

Close Analysis

Reason Marker = R (or P)Conclusion Marker = CAssuring Term = AGuarding Term = GDiscounting Term = DPositive Evaluation Term = E+Negative Evaluation Term = E-

How to Reconstruct an Argument

Week 3

Lecture List

3-1: Validity3-2: Soundness3-3: Get down to Basics3-4: Sharpen Edges3-5: Organize Parts3-6: Fill in Gaps and Conclude3-1: An Example of Reconstruction

Vices in Arguments

1. One or more premises is/are FALSE

2. The premises do not provide a good REASON for the conclusion

Virtues in Arguments

-Validity

- Soundness

Deductive Argument

: the conclusion should follow from the premises.

A deductive argument is supposed to be valid.

Validity

An argument VALID if and only if it is not

1. possible that both all of its premises are true and its conclusion is false.

2. whenever its conclusion is false, at least one premise must be false.

-Validity depends on what is possible.

Validity is NOT

1. A valid argument is not necessarily good

2. Validity does not depend on whether the premises and the conclusion are actually true.

Kinds of Arguments

True Conclusion False Conclusion

True Premises Some Valid, Some

Not

ALL INVALID

A False Premise Some Valid, Some

Not

Some Valid, Some

Not

Soundness

An argument is SOUND if and only if

1. All of its premises are true, and

2. it is valid

Kind of Arguments

Premises_Conclusion Valid__Not Valid

True TrueSound Not Sound

True FalseImpossible Not Sound

False True Not Sound Not Sound

False False Not Sound Not Sound

Unsound Arguments

An Argument is unsound if:1. The argument is invalid2. It has a false premise

- If a deductive argument is not sound, it is not a good argument

- If an argument is invalid, it is unsound

Reconstruction Goals & Steps Pt. 1

Goal: The goal of reconstruction is to put an argument in a form in which we can easily and accurately assess it in as fair a manner as possible.

STAGE I: Close AnalysisStep 1 - Do a close analysis

STAGE II : Get Down to BasicsStep 2 - Remove all excess verbiageStep 3 - List all explicit premises and conclusion in

_______standard formSTAGE III: Sharpen Edges

Step 4 - Clarify where needed.

Reconstruction Steps Pt. 2

STAGE IV: Organize PartsStep 6 - Divide the argument into sub-arguments,

and _______arrange them in order.STAGE V: Fill In Gaps

Step 7 - Assess whether each argument is valid.Step 8 - Ass suppresses premises where neededStep 9 - Check each premise for truth.Step 10 - Qualify premises to make them true where

________needed if possible. STAGE VI: Assess The Argument

Step 11 - Conclude.

Excess Verbiage

- Repetition- Road Markers 6:00: helpful for keeping track of an

argument, but they do not add anything to the argument itself.

- Tangents: a completely different or divergent course

of veribiage, Red Herring: Something that draws

attention away from the central issue.

- Examples

Sharpen Edges

- We should seek adequate precision and adequate clarity.

- Clarify premises by breaking them into smaller parts when this does not distort the premises.

Types of Structures

1. Linear structure

2. Branching Stucture

3. Joint Structure

4. Some combination thereof

The Method

1. Identify and number the premises and conclusion.

2. When the premises work together, put a plus sign between them and draw a line under them.

3. Draw arrows from reasons to claims that they are reasons for.

4. Rearrange as necessary

Linear Structure

One premise gives a reason for a conclusion, and that conclusion is then a premise for another conclusion.

1.

2.

3.

Branching Structure

-The premises provide independent support for the conclusion.

1

1*

2

Joint Structure

- The premises work together to provide support for the conclusion, and neither premise alone is sufficient for_the conclusion.

1. +

2.

3.

Reasons to Fill in Suppressed Premises

1. To examine and assess the assumptions ot the argument2. To understand the argument better

Goals of Filling In Suppressed Premises

1. To trace the full path of the arguer's reasoning

2. To find out if there are any missteps in the argument

Types of Suppressed Premises

1. Factual

2. Moral

3. Norm - Based

4. Linguistic

ConcludeSTAGE VI: Assess The Argument

Step 11 - Conclude.

11.1 If you find a sound reconstruction, accept the conclusion, since it must be true.

11.2 If you try hard enough, but fail to find a sound reconstruction, then it is often reasonable to conclude that the argument is not sound.

Propositional Logic and Truth Tables

Week 4

Lecture List

4-1: Intro to Deductive Arguments4-2: Propositions & Propositional Connectives4-3: Truth Functional connectives Conjunction4-4: Truth Functional Connectives Disjunction4-5: Propositional Logic Negation4-6: Propositional Logic Conditionals

Deductive argument - An argument that is presented as valid. (See slide 56)

Proposition and Propositional Connective

Proposition - The kind of thing that can be true or false and that can serve as the premise or the conclusion of an argument.

Propositional Connective - a phrase that connects to a proposition in order to express another proposition.

Categorical Logic and Syllogisms

Week 5

Lecture List

5-1: Intro to Categorical Logic

5-2: Syllogisms

Inductive Arguments

Week 6

Lecture List

6-1: What is Induction? 6-2: Generalizations from Samples6-3: When are Generalizations Strong?6-4: Applying Generalizations6-5: Inference to the Best Explanation6-6: Which Explanation is best?6-7: Arguments from Analogy