Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd
Upload
2 views

Lecture 2 Introduction ToArguments

This document serves as an introduction to arguments, outlining key components such as conclusions, evidence, and various types of arguments including deductive, inductive, and causal reasoning. It provides examples to illustrate how arguments are structured and emphasizes the importance of identifying main conclusions and relevant evidence. The instructor, Sumera Kazi, guides learners through understanding logical reasoning and its application in argumentation.

Uploaded by

Sumera Kazi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
2 views

Lecture 2 Introduction ToArguments

This document serves as an introduction to arguments, outlining key components such as conclusions, evidence, and various types of arguments including deductive, inductive, and causal reasoning. It provides examples to illustrate how arguments are structured and emphasizes the importance of identifying main conclusions and relevant evidence. The instructor, Sumera Kazi, guides learners through understanding logical reasoning and its application in argumentation.

Uploaded by

Sumera Kazi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 14

Module # 2

Introduction to Arguments

Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University


1. Logic and its terms

Getting 2. Introduction to Arguments


3. Introduction to Conclusions
started 4. Introduction to Evidences
with 5. Introduction to Flaws
Logical 6. Anatomy of a Logical Reasoning Question
Reasoning 7. Practice

Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University


 What is an argument?
 An argument is a set of
statements made up, at
minimum, of the following parts:
 A main conclusion: This
Introducti statement is a claim that expresses
on to what the arguer is trying to
Argument persuade to accept, whether or not
it actually is true.
s  An Evidence: Also known as
premises or support, the arguer
provides these statements in order
to show us that the conclusion is
true.
Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University
 Claim: "Parents should be given
guaranteed parental leave upon the
birth or introduction of a new child."
 Reason: "By giving them guaranteed
parental leave, parents have more
time to acclimate to their new role,
responsibilities and lifestyle, which
Example: can have a positive impact on their
professional performance."
 Evidence: "In 2016, the National
Library of Medicine published a study
that found that companies that offered
extended and paid parental leave
experienced lower employee turnover
rates."
Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University
Types of Arguments

1. Deductive Argument:
Deductive reasoning involves drawing a specific conclusion based
on general premises. If the premises are true, the conclusion must
also be true.
Example:
Premise 1: All humans are mortal.
Premise 2: Philosopher is a human.
Conclusion: Therefore, Philosopher is mortal.

2. Inductive Argument:
Inductive reasoning involves drawing a general conclusion based on
specific observations. While the conclusion is likely, it is not
guaranteed to be true.
Example:
Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University
Observation: Every observed crow is black.
3. Abductive Argument:
Abductive reasoning involves making reasoning to the best
explanation. It aims to find the most believable explanation for a set
of observations or data.
Example:
Observation: The grass is wet.
Explanation: It must have rained recently/ gardner watered the grass.

4. Analogical Argument:
Analogical reasoning involves comparing two similar cases and
inferring that what is true for one case is likely true for the other.
Example:
Case 1: Cats are carnivores and have sharp teeth.
Case 2: Tigers are also carnivores and have sharp teeth.
Conclusion: Therefore, tigers, like cats, are likely to have a similar
diet. Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University
5. Causal Argument:
Causal reasoning involves establishing a cause-and-effect relationship
between two or more variables.
Example:
Premise: Increased consumption of sugary drinks is associated with higher
rates of obesity.
Conclusion: Therefore, sugary drinks likely contribute to obesity.

6. Moral Argument:
Moral reasoning involves making arguments based on ethical principles or
moral values.
Example:
Premise: Killing innocent people is morally wrong.
Conclusion: Therefore, the death penalty is morally wrong.

7. Empirical Argument:
Empirical reasoning relies on evidence gathered through observation or
experimentation to support a claim.
Example: Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University
Sarah will probably receive a
job offer, because she has ten
example: years of experience.

Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University


1.Conclusion + Evidence
 Here’s an example:
 Sarah will probably receive a job offer, because she has ten years of
experience.

 Which piece is the conclusion, and which piece is the


Argument evidence?
Types Conclusion: Sarah will probably receive a job offer
cont. Because/Support/Evidence: She has ten years of experience.
Explanation: Since the answer to the question, “Why do you
believe Sarah will probably receive a job offer?” is logically, “I
believe that because she has ten years of experience”, then we
can feel confident that we designated the correct conclusion
and evidence.

Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University


 Main conclusion:
 The claim that is backed by the rest of the
argument as a whole
 Backed by support
 The claim that the argument as a whole is trying
Main & to establish

Sub  Sub-conclusion:
Conclusion  Also called intermediate or subsidiary conclusions
 Claims that function as both conclusion and
s support
 A conclusion that supports a further conclusion
(or conclusions)
 Backed by support, and simultaneously support
a different interrelated claim

Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University


2. Conclusion + Evidence +
Intermediate Conclusion
 Intermediate Conclusion: is a claim that
acts both as a conclusion and as evidence. This
conclusion leads to yet another conclusion.
 For that reason, the intermediate conclusion can’t
Argument be the main conclusion.
Types  For Example: Sarah will probably receive a job
cont. offer, because she has ten years of experience. That
means that she’ll soon pay me back for the money I
lent her.
 Explanation: Sarah receiving a job offer is the
reason to believe that she’ll pay me back. So Sarah
receiving a job offer is the conclusion for her having
ten years of experience, but it’s also the evidence
for the prediction that she’ll soon pay me back.
Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University
3. Conclusion + Evidence + Background
Information
 Background information is provided in order to “set the
stage” and familiarize/orient us to the situation.
 Our original argument again: Sarah will probably receive a
job offer, because she has ten years of experience.
 You might be asking yourself, “Who’s Sarah? What job?
Experience in what?” and that’s where background
Argument information comes in. Here’s a longer version, including
background information:
Types  Explanation:
cont.  One of this neighborhood’s residents has been
complaining about his sister Sarah having been
unemployed for so long. She’s applying for
programming jobs at many companies, but she only
received her first interview invite last week. She’ll
probably receive a job offer because she has ten
years of experience. In a job market like the current
one, anything over eight years of experience gives
a candidate a great advantage.
Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University
 Primary goals on argument-based questions is to
rephrase an argument in its “conclusion,
because support” form in order to keep it simple.
 It’s rare that background information holds
information critical to your ability to complete the
task.
Summary  When we read logical reasoning arguments critically,
of we read with a purpose, and most of the time, our
purpose will be to break the argument into its
Argument components so that we can answer the question!

s  In most cases, how do we identify the main


conclusion?
 In most cases, how do we identify the relevant
evidence?
 See in the next slide

Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University


Conclusion Evidence
 Thus
 Therefore
 Hence  Because
 So  Since
 Conclude  After all
Signal  It follows that  On the grounds that

Words  As a result
 Clearly
 Given that
 For
 Obviously  As shown by
 Nevertheless-still
 Nonetheless-on the other
hand

Instructor: Sumera Kazi, Lecturer DMS Isra University

You might also like