Arguments and Statements

Argument: Group of statements intended to prove or support another statement

composed of
1. Premises: Statements in an argument offered as evidence or reasons why one should
accept the conclusion (Since, for, seeing that, in view of, the fact that, because, as, and
given that)
2. Conclusion: Statement that the premises support/prove (Therefore, hence, so, it follows
that, wherefore, thus, and consequently)

Statement: Sentence/utterance that can be viewed as either true or false (Does it make sense to
put “it is true that” or “it is false that” in front of a sentence?). Can be about subjective matters of
personal experience as well as objectively verifiable matters of fact

Not all sentences are statements

Tricky Statements
- Rhetorical question: Sentence that has the grammatical form of a question but is meant
to be understood as a statement (Don’t you know smoking will kill you?)
- Ought imperative: Sentence that has the form of a command but is intended to assert
what ought to be done.

TYPES OF NONARGUMENTATIVE DISCOURSE

- Reports: Convey information about a subject.
- Unsupported assumptions: When someone puts forth what he believes
- Conditional (“if-then”) statements (If it rains, the picnic will be canceled)
Antecedent: Part of the statement that follows the word “if” - Consequent: Part of the statement
that follows the word “then”
- Chain arguments: Arguments can be composed entirely of conditional statements (If A
then B. If B then C. Therefore, if A then C.)
- Illustrations: Do not prove or support the claim but provide examples of the claim
- Explanation: Tries to show why something is the case, not to prove that it is the case
(Titanic sank because it struck an iceberg)
Format: Explanandum (Statement that is explained) because Explanans (does the explaining)

Distinguish Arguments and Explanations

Common-knowledge Past-event test Author’s intent test Principle of charity
test test

Deductive arguments: try to prove their conclusions with rigorous, inescapable logic. (the
conclusion follows with logical necessity from the premises)
Inductive arguments: try to show that their conclusions are plausible or likely given the
premises. (the premises provide evidence for the conclusion, but does not guarantee it.)

We take several specific cases that we experience and/or observe and generalize from them, this
kind of a reasoning is known as inductive reasoning.
Deduction moves from general premises to particular conclusions (All males are mortal.
“general premise” I am a male. Therefore, I am mortal. “particular conclusion”)

Induction moves from particular premises to general conclusions (The last two winter days were
cold. “particular premise” Therefore, all winter days are cold.) “general conclusion”

Tests to Determine Whether an Argument Is Deductive or Inductive

Indicator word test

Examples of deduction indicator words: Certainly, definitely, this entails that, and conclusively
Examples of induction indicator words: Probably, likely, one would expect that, odds are that,
and it is reasonable to assume that

Strict necessity test

An argument’s conclusion either follows with strict logical necessity from its premises or it does
not
- If it does, the argument should always be treated as deductive
- If it doesn’t, the argument should be treated as inductive

Exceptions to the strict necessity test

Common pattern test

There are many common patterns that valid arguments “use” (For example: If P then Q. P.
Therefore, Q.)
If an argument follows this pattern, it is deductive (called modus ponens)

Principle of charity test

When interpreting an unclear argument or passage, always give the speaker or writer the benefit
of the doubt

Hypothetical Syllogism
Three-line argument that contains at least one hypothetical or conditional premise
- If A then B. A. Therefore, B. (modus ponens) affirming the consequent
- If P then Q. If Q then R. Therefore, if P then R. (chain argument)
- If A then B. Not B. Therefore, not A. (modus tollens) denying the antecedent

FALLACIES
A fallacy is an argument that appears to be reasonable and thus tends to persuade us, even though
it is, in fact, a bad argument. (The form of a valid argument, but in fact are deductively invalid)
Two known formal fallacies are: ‘affirming the consequent’ ‘denying the antecedent’

Categorical Syllogism
Three-line argument in which each statement begins with the word all, some, or no
(All A’s are B’s. All B’s are C’s. Therefore, all A’s are C’s.)
Argument by Elimination
Seeks to logically rule out various possibilities until only a single possibility remains.

Arguments Based on Mathematics

Argument in which the conclusion depends largely or entirely on some mathematical calculation
or measurement

Arguments from Definition

An argument in which the conclusion is presented as being “true by definition,” that is, as
following simply from the meaning of some key word or phrase used

Common Patterns of Inductive Reasoning

Inductive Generalization
Drawing a generalization as a likely conclusion based on information about some members of a
particular class (Generalization: Statement that attributes characteristics to all or most members
of some group or class)

Predictive Argument
An argument in which a prediction is defended with reasons (So far, all the b’s I have seen have
had property P. Therefore, the next b I see will have property P)
In some cases, predictions can be argued for deductively

Argument from Authority

Asserts a claim and then supports that claim by citing some presumed authority or witness who
has said that the claim is true (P said that A was true. Therefore, A is true.)

Causal Argument
Asserts or denies that something is the cause of something else (I can’t log in. The network must
be down.)

Statistical Argument
Rests on statistical evidence (evidence that some percentage of some group or class has some
particular characteristic)
 is used to support claims that are presented as probable, statistical arguments are usually
inductive

Argument from Analogy

Argument in which the conclusion is claimed to depend on an analogy; that is, a comparison or
similarity between two or more things (These things are similar in such-and-such ways.
Therefore, they are similar in some further way)
 Deductive Validity
A valid deductive argument is an argument in which it is impossible for all the premises to be
true and the conclusion false. (If the premises are true, the conclusion must be true)

It is not necessary to know whether an argument’s premises or conclusion are true to know
whether the argument is valid
- Some valid arguments have obviously false premises and a false conclusion
- Some valid arguments have false premises and a true conclusion
- Some valid arguments have true premises and a true conclusion
- No valid argument can have all true premises and a false conclusion
An argument can be a good argument and be invalid and could be a bad argument but be valid

Invalid deductive argument

Deductive argument in which the conclusion does not follow necessarily from the premises
Validity is important because it preserves truth

Deductive Validity: Sound and Unsound Deductive Arguments

- Sound deductive argument: Deductive argument that is both valid and has all true
premises
- Unsound deductive argument: Deductive argument that either is invalid or has at least
one false premise, or both

Inductive Strength
- Strong inductive argument: Inductive argument in which the conclusion follows probably
from the premises
- Weak inductive argument: An inductive argument in which the conclusion does not
follow probably from the premises

Even if an argument is inductively strong, it can still have a false premise and be a “bad
argument”

- Cogent argument: An argument that is inductively strong and has all true premises
- Uncogent argument: An inductive argument that is either weak or has at least one false
premise, or both