10

General Claims

A. General Claims and Their Contradictories

Exercises for Section A . . . . . . .
B. Some Valid and Invalid Forms . . . .
Exercises for Section B . . . . . . .
C. Between One and All
1. Precise generalities . . . . . . . .
2. Vague generalities . . . . . . . .
Exercises for Section C . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

214
217
218
226

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

230
230
231
233

A. General Claims and Their Contradictories

We need to know how to reason with claims that assert something about all or a part
of a collection. For example,
All good teachers give fair exams.
Professor Zzzyzzx gives fair exams.
So Professor Zzzyzzx is a good teacher.
This may seem valid, but its not. The premises could be true, yet Professor Zzzyzzx
could be a terrible teacher and give fair exams from an instructors manual.
Some dogs like cats.
Some cats like dogs.
So some dogs and cats like each other.
This seems valid, too. But its not. It could be that all the dogs that like cats are
abhorred by the cats as too wimpy.
These arguments sound right, but theyre bad. How can we avoid getting lured
into belief? We first need to be clear about what all and some mean.
All means every single one, no exceptions. But then is the following true?
All polar bears in Antarctica can swim.

SECTION A General Claims and Contradictories

215

There are no exceptions: theres not one polar bear in Antarctica that cant swim.
Of course, there also arent any polar bears in Antarctica that can swim. There arent
any polar bears at all in Antarctica.
Some people say the claim is false: There has to be at least one object for us to
be right when we say all in ordinary conversation. Others say the claim is true.
Theres disagreement about some, too. Consider:
Dr. E: At the end of this term, some of my students will get an A.
At the end of the term one student in all of Dr. Es classes got an A. Was Dr. E right?
If you dont think so, then how many is some students? At least 2? At least 8?
At least 10%? More than 18%? Some is purposely vague. We use it when we
cant or dont want to be precise. When we say some, were only guaranteeing
that there is at least one.
Dr. E: Some of my students will pass my next exam.
All Dr. Es students pass the exam. Was Dr. E right? For this claim to be true, dont
some students also have to fail? With some we usually mean at least one, but not
all. But not always. Some and all can be ambiguous.
All means Every single one, no exceptions. Sometimes all is meant
as Every single one, and there is at least one. Which reading is best
may depend on the argument.
Some means At least one. Sometimes some is meant as At least one,
but not all. Which reading is best may depend on the argument.
There are lots of different ways to say all in English. For example, the
following are equivalent claims:
All dogs bark.
Every dog barks.

Dogs bark.
Everything thats a dog barks.

There are lots of ways to say some in the sense of at least one. For
example, the following are equivalent claims:
Some foxes are affectionate.
There is a fox thats affectionate.

At least one fox is affectionate.

There exists an affectionate fox.

There are also lots of ways of saying that nothing or no part of a collection
satisfies some condition. For example, the following are equivalent claims:
No dog likes cats.
All dogs do not like cats.

Nothing thats a dog likes cats.

Not even one dog likes cats.

216

CHAPTER 10 General Claims DRAFT Spring 2012

No means not even one, every single one is not.

Another word used in general claims is only. Consider:
Only postal employees deliver U.S. mail.
Laurie is a postal employee.
So Laurie delivers U.S. mail.
This is not valid. Only postal employees deliver U.S. mail does not mean that all
postal employees deliver U.S. mail. It means that anyone who delivers U.S. mail
has got to be a postal employee. To clarify the meaning of only, and for other
analyses in this chapter, lets use the letter S, P, Q, R for parts of a sentence.
Only Only S are P means All P are S.
Its easy to get confused about a contradictory of a general claim. Recall
that a contradictory of a claim is one that has the opposite truth-value no matter
what the circumstances are. For example, heres an advertisement thats on TV:
Zocor is a cholesterol medicine. Zocor is not right for everyone.
Why are they advertising medicine that no one should use? Theyve got the
contradictory of Zocor is right for everyone wrong. It should be: Zocor is
not right for some people.
And a contradictory of All dogs bark isnt All dogs dont bark. Both
claims are false. A contradictory is Some dogs dont bark.
A contradictory of Some students are athletes isnt Some students are not
athletes. Both of those claims are true. Rather, its Not even one student is an
athlete, or All students are not athletes, or better still, No student is an athlete.
Here are some examples of claims and their contradictories:
Claim

Contradictory

All dogs bark.

Some dogs dont bark.

Some dogs bark.

No dogs bark.

Some dogs dont bark.

All dogs bark.

No women are philosophers.

Some women are philosophers.

Every Mexican likes vodka.

Some Mexicans dont like vodka.

Some Russians like chile.

No Russian likes chile.

Some whales eat fish.

Not even one whale eats fish.

DRAFT Spring 2012

EXERCISES for Section A

217

A contradictory of Only S are P can be made in two ways:

Not every P is S.
Some P are not S.
So Only postal employees deliver mail is contradicted by Some people who
deliver mail are not postal employees. If we want to say that just exactly postal
employees and no one else delivers U.S. mail, we should say that. Or we can say:
All postal employees and only postal employees deliver U.S. mail.
Contradictory Either some postal employees dont deliver U.S. mail,
or some people who deliver U.S. mail arent postal employees.
Because there are so many ways we can make general claims, its hard to give
set formulas for contradictories. With some practice you ought to be able to use your
common sense to get a correct one. As an aid, heres a rough guide:
Claim

Contradictory

All

Some are not

Not every

Some

No
All are not
Not even one

Some are not

All are

No

Some are

Only S are P

Some P are not S

Not every P is S

Exercises for Section A

_________________________________________________

1. Give two other ways to say All dogs eat meat.

2. Give two other ways to say Some cats can swim.
3. Give two other ways to say All computers are powered by electricity.
4. Give two other ways to say Some state governors are women.
5. Give another way to say Only birds fly.
6. Give two other ways to say No police officer is under 18 years old.
7. Give another way to say Everything thats a dog is a domestic canine, and everything
thats a domestic canine is a dog.
8. Give two other ways to say No pig can fly.
9. Judging from your experience, which of the following claims are true? Be prepared to
defend your answer.

218

CHAPTER 10 General Claims DRAFT Spring 2012

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.

Only dogs bark.

All blondes are dumb.
Some textbooks are designed to fall apart after one semester.
Crest toothpaste is not for sale in all stores.
Some English professors are women.
Dictionaries are the only way to learn the meaning of new words.
No student can register for this course after the first week of classes.

10. For each of the following, give a contradictory claim.

a. All students like to study.
b. No women are construction workers.
c. Every CEO of a Fortune 500 company is a man.
d. This exam will be given in all of the sections of critical thinking.
e. No exam is suitable for all students.
f. Some exams dont really test a students knowledge.
g. Not all drunk drivers get in accidents.
h. Donkeys eat carrots.
i. Only the good die young.
j. All teachers and only teachers are allowed to grade exams.
k. Nothing both barks and meows.
l. Tom will start every football game if hes not suspended.
m. If some football player is a vegetarian, then his coach will hate him.
n. All decisions about abortion should be left to the woman and her doctor.
o. The Lone Ranger was the only cowboy to have a friend called Tonto.
11. There are general claims about time, too. Give a contradictory for each of the following:
a. Dr. E always gives an exam when he is irritated with his students.
b. It never rains in Seattle in July.
c. Sometimes Spot will not chase Puff.
d. Only during the winter are there flocks of birds along the river.

B. Some Valid and Invalid Forms

Recall the first argument in this chapter:
All good teachers give fair exams. Professor Zzzyzzx gives fair exams.
So Professor Zzzyzzx is a good teacher.
We saw that its weak: Professor Zzzyzzx could be among the bad teachers who give
fair exams. Heres a diagram that summarizes the discussion:
teachers who give fair exams
good teachers

a Prof. Z

DRAFT Spring 2012

SECTION B Some Valid and Invalid Forms

219

This argument sounds good because its similar to a valid form of argument.
Schematically, where a stands for the name of someone or something:
The direct way of reasoning
with all
All S are P
a is S
So a is P

All S are P
a is P
So a is S

Valid

All S are P + a is S

Usually
weak

All S are P + a is P

a is P

Valid: All dogs bark.

Ralph is a dog.
So Ralph barks.

Arguing backwards
with all

a is S

Weak: All dogs bark.

Ralph barks.
So Ralph is a dog.

The argument on the right is overlooking possibilities. One way to be something that
barks is to be a dog, but there may be other ways (seals and foxes).
Example 1 All mortgage brokers are honest. Ralph is a mortgage broker.
So Ralph is honest.
Analysis This is valid, an example of the direct way of reasoning with all.
But though valid, its not good: the first premise is false, as we learned in the
financial crash of 2008.
Example 2 All stockbrokers earn more than $50,000. Earl earns more than
$50,000. So Earl is a stockbroker.
Analysis This is weak, arguing backwards with all. Earl could be a basketball
player or a mortgage broker.
The diagram on the previous page is an example of a way to check whether
certain kinds of arguments that use general claims are valid.
Checking for validity with diagrams
A collection is represented by an enclosed area.
If one area is entirely within another, then everything in the one
collection is also in the other.
If one area overlaps another, then there is something that is
common to both collections.

220

CHAPTER 10 General Claims DRAFT Spring 2012

An a or a dot in an area marks that a particular object is in

that collection.
Draw the areas to represent the premises as true while trying to
represent the conclusion as false. If you can, then the argument
is invalid. If theres no way to represent the premises as true
and the conclusion as false, the argument is valid.
For example, we can use diagrams to check whether the following is valid:
All dogs bark. Everything that barks is a mammal.
So all dogs are mammals.
We first draw the diagram to represent the premises as true.
The dogs area is completely inside the
things that bark area: All dogs bark.

mammals
things that bark

The things that bark area is completely

inside the mammals area: All things that
bark are mammals.

dogs

So the dogs area ends up being inside the mammals area. Theres no way it
couldnt be. That represents that all dogs are mammals. So if we represent the
premises as true, we are forced to represent the conclusion as true. The argument
is valid.
Compare that to a similar argument:
Some kangaroos are tame. Some creatures that are tame
live in New Zealand. So some kangaroos live in New Zealand.
Is the argument valid? What do we need to have in a diagram?
The kangaroos area must overlap the
tame area: Some kangaroos are tame.
The tame area must overlap the
New Zealand area: Some creatures
that are tame live in New Zealand

kangaroos
tame
New Zealand

We were able to draw the diagram to represent both premises as true, yet theres
no overlap between the kangaroos area and the New Zealand area, so the
conclusion is false: Its possible that no kangaroos live in New Zealand. Thus, the
argument is invalid. Even though its conclusion is true (there are some kangaroos
in zoos there), its weak.

DRAFT Spring 2012

SECTION B Some Valid and Invalid Forms

Reasoning in a chain with all

All S are P
Valid
All P are Q
So all S are Q

Reasoning in a chain with some

Some S are P
Usually
Some P are Q
weak
So some S are Q

All S are P + All P are Q

Some S are P + Some P are Q

All S are Q

Some S are Q

221

Example 3 Every newspaper the Vice-President reads is published by an American

publisher. All newspapers published by an American publisher are biased against
Muslims. So the Vice-President reads only newspapers biased against Muslims.
Analysis This is valid, reasoning in a chain with all.
Example 4 Some cats like ice cream. Some things that like ice cream will bark for
ice cream. So some cats will bark for ice cream.
Analysis This is weak, reasoning in a chain with some.
Heres an argument with no:
All dogs bark.
No professor is a dog.
So no professor barks.
How do we check if this is valid? We do what weve always done: Look for all the
possible ways that the premises could be true. Only now we can use diagrams to
represent those possibilities. We know that the dogs area must be entirely within
the things that bark area (All dogs bark). So we just have to figure out where to
put the professors area. We know that there must be no overlap of the professors
area and the dogs area (No professor is a dog). Here are three possibilities:
1.

professors

things that bark

dogs

things that bark

2.
professors

dogs

things that bark

3.
professors

dogs

These (schematically) represent all the ways the premises could be true. Yet in both
(2) and (3) the conclusion is represented as false. Its possible for there to be a
professor who barks, even though he (she?) isnt a dog. Arf arf. The argument is
invalid. It mimics a valid form of argument.

222

CHAPTER 10 General Claims DRAFT Spring 2012

The direct way of reasoning

with no
All S are P
No Q is P
Valid
So no Q is S

Arguing backwards
with no
All S are P
Usually
No Q is S
Weak
So no Q is P

All S are P + No Q is P

All S are P + No Q is S

No Q is S

No Q is P

Example 5 All corporations are legal entities. No computer is a legal entity. So no

computer is a corporation.
Analysis This is valid, the direct way of reasoning with no.
Example 6 All nursing students take calculus in their freshman year. No heroin
addict is a nursing student. So no heroin addict takes calculus in their freshman year.
Analysis This is weak, arguing backwards with no.
Here are three examples of how Maria and Lee have been using diagrams to
check for validity.

DRAFT Spring 2012

SECTION B Some Valid and Invalid Forms

223

224

CHAPTER 10 General Claims DRAFT Spring 2012

DRAFT Spring 2012

SECTION B Some Valid and Invalid Forms

225

226

CHAPTER 10 General Claims DRAFT Spring 2012

Drawing diagrams to check validity is just another way to look for possibilities
that make the premises true and the conclusion false. The method works for some
arguments that use general claims, but not for all. Even the simple argument we
began the chapter with about dogs that like cats cant be analyzed using diagrams
this way. Youll have to think your way through the ways the premises could be true
when you do some of the exercises.
Exercises for Section B

_________________________________________________

Which of the argument forms in Exercises 16 are valid? Justify your answer. Then give an
argument of that form.
1. All S are P.
No Q is S.
So some Q arent P.
2. All S are P.
a is S.
So a is P.
3. Some S are P.
All P are Q.
So some S are Q.
4. Only S are P.
a is S.
So a is P.
5. Some S arent P.
So no P are S.
6. All S are P.
No Q is P.
So no Q is S.
Exercises 714 are simple examples for you to develop some skill in analyzing general
claims. For each, select the claim that makes the argument validyoure not asked to
judge whether the claim is plausible, just whether it makes the argument valid.
7. All turtles can swim. So turtles eat fish.
a. Anything that eats fish swims.
b. Fish swim and are eaten by things that swim.
c. Anything that swims eats fish.
d. None of the above.

DRAFT Spring 2012

EXERCISES for Section B

227

8. Anyone who plagiarizes is cheating. So Ralph plagiarizes.

a. Ralph wrote three critical thinking essays in two days.
b. Ralph cheated last week.
c. Both (a) and (b).
d. None of the above.
9. Pigs are mammals. So pigs eat apples.
a. Anything that eats apples is a mammal.
b. Pigs dont eat meat.
c. Anything that is a mammal eats apples.
d. None of the above.
10. All professional dancers cannot hold a day job. So no lawyer is a professional dancer.
a. Lawyers dont usually like to dance.
b. Dancers arent interested in making money.
c. Being a lawyer is a day job.
d. Professional dancers cant write essays.
e. None of the above.
11. Every voter must have a legal residence. So no sex-offender has a legal residence.
a. No sex-offender is a voter.
b. No sex-offender can register to vote.
c. If youre a sex-offender, then no one will want to live near you.
d. None of the above.
12. Some cats chase songbirds. So some songbirds are eaten by cats.
a. Some cats catch songbirds.
b. Some things that chase songbirds eat them.
c. Some songbirds attack cats.
d. None of the above.
13. Every dog chases cats. So Spot chases Puff.
a. Spot is a dog.
b. Puff is a cat.
c. Puff irritates Spot.
d. Both (a) and (b).
e. None of the above.
14. Manuel is sweating. So he must be hot.
a. Manuel sweats when he is hot.
b. Anyone who is hot sweats.
c. Only Manuel sweats when he is hot.
d. Only people who are hot sweat.
e. None of the above.
Which of Exercises 1532 are valid arguments? Youre not asked to determine whether the
argument is good, only whether it is valid. Check by doing one of the following:

228

CHAPTER 10 General Claims DRAFT Spring 2012

Give a possible way in which the premises could be true and the conclusion false
to show its invalid.
Draw a diagram.
Point out that the argument is in one of the forms we have studied.
Explain in your own words why its valid.
15. Not every student attends lectures. Lee is a student. So Lee doesnt attend lectures.

16. No professor subscribes to Rolling Stone magazine. Maria is not a professor.

So Maria subscribes to Rolling Stone magazine.

17. No professor subscribes to Rolling Stone magazine. Lou subscribes to Rolling Stone
magazine. So Lou is not a professor.

18. Some dogs bite postal workers. Some postal workers bite dogs. So some dogs and
postal workers bite each other.

19. Everyone who is anxious to learn works hard. Dr. Es students work hard. So Dr. Es
students are anxious to learn.

20. All CEOs of Fortune 500 companies earn more than $400,000. Ralph earns more than
$400,000. So Ralph is a CEO of a Fortune 500 company.

21. All students who are serious take critical thinking in their freshman year. No one who
smokes marijuana every week is a serious student. So no one who smokes marijuana
every week takes critical thinking his or her freshman year.

22. No student who cheats is honest. Some dishonest people are found out. So some
students who cheat are found out.

23. Only ducks quack. George is a duck. So George quacks.

24. Everyone who likes ducks likes quackers. Dick likes ducks. Dick likes cheese.
So Dick likes cheese and quackers.

25. No dogcatcher is kind. Anyone who is kind loves dogs. So no dogcatcher loves dogs.

DRAFT Spring 2012

EXERCISES for Section B

229

26. Some things that grunt are hogs. Some hogs are good to eat. So some things that grunt
are good to eat.

27. All dogs chase cats. All cats chase birds. So all dogs chase birds.

28.

29. Some paraplegics cant play basketball. Belinda is a paraplegic. So Belinda cant
play basketball.

30. Every dog loves its master. Dr. E has a dog. So Dr. E is loved.

31. Only janitors have access to this building after midnight. Paul is a janitor. So Paul has
access to the building after midnight.

32. All mammals have both a heart and a liver. The fossil remains of this animal show that
it had a heart and a liver. So it must have been a mammal.

33. Arguing backwards with all and arguing backwards with conditionals are related.
We can rewrite:
All dogs bark.
Ralph barks.
So Ralph is a dog.

as

If anything is a dog, then it barks.

Ralph barks.
So Ralph is a dog.

Rewrite the following claims as conditionals:

a. All cats cough hair balls.
b. Every donkey eats hay.
c. Everything thats made of chocolate is good to eat.
d. Ducks like water.

230

CHAPTER 10 General Claims DRAFT Spring 2012

C. Between One and All

1.

Precise generalities

There are a lot of quantities between one and all. For example,
72% of all students who take critical thinking from Dr. E think hes the
best teacher theyve ever had. Harry took Dr. Es critical thinking course
last year. So Harry thinks Dr. E is the best teacher hes ever had.
This is not valid. Where does it land on the strongweak scale? We can say exactly:
Theres a 28% chance the premises could be true and the conclusion false, which is
not strong. If the percentages are very high or very low, though, we can get a strong
argument, assuming we know nothing more about the people or things involved:
95% plus-or-minus 2% of all cat owners have cat-induced allergies.
Dr. Es ex-wife has a cat. So Dr. Es ex-wife has cat-induced allergies.
Only 4 of the 123 students who take Dr. Es classes failed his final exam.
Mary Ellen took Dr. Es class. So Mary Ellen passed Dr. Es final exam.

2. Vague generalities
There are a lot of ways we talk about all or a part of a collection without specifying a
precise number:
All dogs bark.
Almost all dogs bark.
Many students at this school will vote.
Most dogs bark.
A lot of students at this school will vote.
Some students study hard.
A few students study hard.
Very few students dislike Dr. E.
Though the words all and some can be ambiguous, weve seen that we can
analyze whether arguments using them are valid. We have enough precision.
The rest of these quantity words are too vague to figure in valid arguments.
Most of them are too vague even to be used in a claim. How could we tell if
A few students dislike Dr. E is true? Or whether A lot of students will vote
is true?
There are two vague generalities, though, that we can use in strong arguments:
Almost all parakeets are under 2 feet tall.
So the parakeets at Boulevard Mall are under 2 feet tall.

DRAFT Spring 2012

EXERCISES for Section C 231

Very few dogs dont bark.

Spot is a dog.
So Spot barks.
The premises give us good reason to believe the conclusion of each, even though the
conclusion doesnt follow with no exceptions. The following are the almost all
versions of the forms for all.
The direct way of reasoning
with almost all

Arguing backwards
with almost all

Almost all S are P

Usually
a is S
strong
So a is P

Almost all S are P

Usually
a is P
weak
So a is S

Almost all S are P + a is S

Almost all S are P + a is P

a is P

a is S

But reasoning in a chain with almost all is usually weak. For example:
Almost all dogs like peanut butter.
Almost all things that like peanut butter dont bark.
So almost all dogs dont bark.
The premises are true and the conclusion false.
Reasoning in a chain with almost all
Almost all S are P.
Almost all P are Q.
So almost all S are Q.

Usually
weak

An argument of this form might be strong if you could specify exactly which S arent
P, and which P arent Q. But thats just to say you need further premises.
Exercises for Section C

_________________________________________________

1. Give two other ways to say Almost all teenagers listen to rock music.
2. Give two other ways to say Only a few adults listen to rock music.
Which of the argument forms in Exercises 36 are strong? Justify your answer and
give an example.

232

CHAPTER 10 General Claims DRAFT Spring 2012

3. Very few S are P..
a is S.
So a is not P.
4. Very few S are P.
a is P.
So a is not S.
5. Most S are P
Most P are Q.
So most S are Q.
6. Almost all S are P.
Every P is Q.
So almost all S are Q.
Which of the following arguments are strong? Check by doing one of the following:
Give a not unlikely possible way in which the premises are true and the conclusion
false to show the argument is weak.
Point out that the argument is in one of the forms we have studied.
Explain in your own words why its strong or weak.
7. Very few college students use heroin. Zoe is a college student. So Zoe doesnt
use heroin.

8. Almost no students read The New York Review of Books. Martha reads The New York
Review of Books. So Martha is not a student.

9. Only a very few dogs like cats. Almost no cats like dogs. So virtually no dogs and cats
like each other.

10. No student who cheats is honest. Almost all dishonest people are found out.
So almost all students who cheat are found out.

11. Almost all people who are vegetarians like pizza. Almost all vegetarians will not eat
eggs. So all but a few people who like pizza will not eat eggs.

12. Most newspaper columnists have a college degree. Almost everyone who has a college
degree is not self-employed. So most newspaper columnists are not self-employed.

DRAFT Spring 2012

EXERCISES for Section C 233

13. Very few paraplegics can play basketball. Belinda is a paraplegic. So Belinda cant
play basketball.

14. All but a few members of Congress have a college degree. Mr. Ensign is a member of
Congress. So Mr. Ensign has a college degree.

15. Almost every dog loves its master. Dr. E has a dog. So Dr. E is loved.

Summary General claims are how we assert something about all or part of a
collection. We studied ways to use all, some, no, and only in arguments.
We first tried to get clear about how to understand those words, and then noted that
there are lots of equivalent ways to say them and to form their contradictories. Then
we looked at a few valid and invalid forms of arguments using those words. We also
saw that we could sometimes use diagrams to decide if an argument is valid.
Other precise general claims that lie between one and all normally dont
figure in valid arguments, but we saw that sometimes they can figure in strong
arguments.
Then we looked at vague generalities. Most dont figure in good arguments.
Most dont even belong in claims. But almost all and a few can be used in
strong arguments. We looked at some strong and weak argument forms using them.
Key Words

all
some
no
only
contradictory
direct way of reasoning
with all
arguing backwards with all
reasoning in a chain with all

reasoning in a chain with some

direct way of reasoning with no
arguing backwards with no
precise generalities
vague generalities
direct way of reasoning with
almost all
arguing backwards with almost all
reasoning in a chain with almost all

Further Study My book Predicate Logic, also published by the Advanced Reaoning
Forum, is an introduction to the role of general claims in valid arguments. An
introductory course on formal logic will cover that, too.

Writing Lesson 8

Write an argument either for or against the following:

No one should be allowed to ride in the back of a pickup truck.
Check whether your instructor has chosen a different topic for this assignment.
As for Writing Lesson 7, you should hand in two pages:
First page
A list of premises and the conclusion.
Second page The argument written as an essay with indicator words.
We should be able to see at a glance from the list of premises whether your argument
is good. The essay form should read just as clearly, if you use indicator words well.
Remember, there should be no claims in the essay form that arent listed as premises.
The issue is simple. Theres nothing subtle that youre supposed to do here that
you havent done on the previous assignments. You just need to know how to argue
for or against a general claim. And for that you must be able to form a contradictory
of it.
By now you should have learned a lot about writing arguments. You dont
need more examples, just practice using the new ideas presented in the chapters.
As a guide you can use the section Composing Good Arguments at the end of this
book, which summarizes many of the lessons youve learned.