Download
1 / 14
140 likes | 149 Views
Understand the difference between independent and dependent support in arguments through examples and diagrams. Learn how statements interact to strengthen or weaken conclusions.
E N D
Chapter 7: Analyzing Arguments http://b1105.wordpress.com/ (my past papers?)
The difference between independent support and dependent (linked) support. • Take two statements that support a third. If the removal of one of the statements indicates that the third is no longer supported—if the one statement by itself doesn’t support the third—then the two statements are dependent (linked). • Example: (1) Most Democrats are liberals. (2) Dumdiddle is a Democrat. Therefore (3) Dumdiddle is a liberal. • Since the mere fact that most Democrats are liberals doesn’t tell us anything about Dumdiddle… • And since Dumdiddle being a Democrat doesn’t tell us that Dumdiddle is a liberal (unless we already know (1))… • We represent the argument like this:
The difference between independent support and dependent (linked) support. • If two statements support a third, but the removal of one doesn’t prevent the other from support the third, we say they provide independent support of the conclusion. • Example: (1) Ten witness say that Blotto robbed the Bank (2) Blotto’s fingerprints were found on the note the robber handed to the teller. (3) Therefore Blotto robbed the bank. • Since (1) is good reason by itself to conclude (3) • and • Since (2) is good reason by itself to conclude (3) • We represent the argument like this:
Diagram the following argument. • 1. If we're in Boise, then we're in Idaho. Hence, since we're not in Idaho, we're not in Boise.
1. If we're in Boise, then we're in Idaho. Hence, since we're not in Idaho, we're not in Boise. • If we're in Boise, then we're in Idaho. Hence, since we're not in Idaho, we're not in Boise.
2. Emily deserves to be promoted to vice president, because she's the most qualified candidate and the CEO promised her the job.
2. Emily deserves to be promoted to vice president, because she's the most qualified candidate and the CEO promised her the job. • Emily deserves to be promoted to vice president, because she's the most qualified candidate and the CEO promised her the job.
3. Either this is a Firebird or it's a Camaro. It's a Firebird only if it's a Pontiac. But it's not a Pontiac. Hence, it's not a Firebird. Hence, it's a Camaro.
3. Either this is a Firebird or it's a Camaro. It's a Firebird only if it's a Pontiac. But it's not a Pontiac. Hence, it's not a Firebird. Hence, it's a Camaro.
There are good reasons why everyone places a high value on freedom. First, all of • us value and desire many things. Second, freedom is simply the ability to act to achieve • goals and satisfy our desires. So anyone who wants anything at all will want the • freedom to try to obtain it. (Stephen Nathanson, Should We Consent to Be Governed? • 1991)
There are good reasons why everyone places a high value on freedom. First, all of • us value and desire many things. Second, freedom is simply the ability to act to achieve • goals and satisfy our desires. So anyone who wants anything at all will want the • freedom to try to obtain it. (Stephen Nathanson, Should We Consent to Be Governed? • 1991)
Paraphrasing • The office wasn’t open at that point in time, owing to the fact that there was no electrical power in the building. • Cigarette smoking causes lung cancer. Therefore, if you continue to smoke, you are endangering your health.
Paraphrasing • The office wasn’t open at that point in time, owing to the fact that there was no electrical power in the building. • Paraphrase: The office was closed then because there was no electricity in the building. • Cigarette smoking causes lung cancer. Therefore, if you continue to smoke, you are endangering your health. • Paraphrase: Cigarette smoking is a positive causal factor that increases the risk of lung cancer. If you continue to smoke, you risk being unhealthy.
Chapter 8: Evaluating Arguments and Truth Claims • USA Today, Don’t Blame the Burgers (pg. 216, Bassham 4th ed.) • 1. Nine of 10 Americans say it’s wrong to hold food companies liable for obesity-related • health problems. • 2. People who know or should know that eating copious orders of high-calorie fast foods • is unhealthy and may result in weight gain have only themselves to blame. • 3. Advice to avoid such foods is hard to miss. • 4. [Thus, it cannot plausibly be claimed that fast-food chains have deceived customers • about their products. (from 3)] • 5. It’s a stretch to suggest that McNuggets are as addictive or dangerous as nicotine. • 6. [Thus, “fat” lawsuits, in contrast to lawsuits against Big Tobacco, cannot be justified • by claiming that the products sold are highly addictive or dangerous. (from 5)] • 7. Ultimately, good eating habits are a matter of personal and parental responsibility. • 8. Thus, it is not the place of the law to protect people who eat too much fast food from • their own excesses. (from 1-2, 4, 6, 7) • 9. Food companies are responding to health findings and consumer demand by, for • example, posting nutritional information and phasing our Super Size programs. • 10. Market forces and public education will work better than lawsuits and government • edicts in trimming the nation’s midsection. • 11. Therefore, our nation’s obesity epidemic should not be addressed by “fat” lawsuits or • government edicts, but by market forces, public education, and an emphasis on personal responsibility. (from 8-10)
