Argument

An argument is defined as a set of claims where the main claim, which is the conclusion (the main point being argued for), is supported by additional claims, called the premises. An argument must contain a conclusion and at least one premise. Arguments are used to provide support for ideas when somebody else is challenging/criticizing them.

A valid argument is an argument that has such good reasoning that as long as all of the premises are true, the conclusion/outcome cannot be false. A sound argument is an argument in which all of the premises are true. A sound and valid argument is an argument in which all of the premises and the reasoning are true, which makes the conclusion/outcome true. A sound and valid argument is the most reliable type of argument.

When evaluating arguments, we use critical thinking. Arguments can fall under two categories: inductive and deductive. Inductive arguments are arguments in which the premises provide probable proof for the conclusion, but not conclusive proof. Deductive arguments are arguments in which the premises do provide conclusive proof for the conclusion, and if all of the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

One type of argument is a conditional argument, which is one that uses if and then, for example “If I do not write this paper then I will fail my final exam,” which is a valid motus ponens. The three types of conditional arguments are motus tolens, motus ponens, and syllogisms. One can find out which of these categories a conditional argument fits into by examining its structure. The motus tolens form of a conditional argument deals with conclusions that are the opposite of the premises. Syllogisms are arguments that deal with more than one premise leading to a conclusion. This type of argument evaluation is formal, because we are looking at the structures of the arguments themselves.

A disjunctive argument is one that uses “or statements.” A strong disjunctive argument is one in which only one of the statements is possible, for example “She either had an identical twin or a fraternal twin.” A weak disjunctive syllogism is one in which it is possible for both statements to be true, for example, she had eggs or bacon for breakfast.”

Fallacies are examples of informal evaluations, because we are looking at the contents of the arguments-what they are saying/implying-rather than the structures. Fallacies/pseudo reasoning are arguments-although bad ones-which persuade us but should not. They are bad arguments because of their content rather than their form. Fallacies can be divided into 4 categories: diversion (trying to distract the reader from noticing there are no reasons given to support the conclusion), emotions (substitute emotion for reasoning), unjustified assumptions (make assumptions that might not be called for), and linguistic fallacies (arguments that involve careless attention to language).