Exercise 1

Argument 1 compares the novel, Women in Love, to Huckleberry Finn to conclude that it must
be a masterpiece based upon the reasoning that the same criticisms levied against Huckleberry
Finn were also attributed to Women in Love.

This is a very weak argument [1] for the following reasons.

1. The sample is small. Do all novels that are called careless and loosely constructed
become masterpieces?
2. While both novels received the same criticism, it does not automatically qualify the
novel in question to possess the same qualities. This is not a cautious conclusion.
3. Simply comparing the criticisms is not enough to fully compare the two novels.
4. There is not enough information to draw a suitable conclusion

Exercise 3

Argument 3 compares marijuana to cigarettes and alcohol by comparing their effects on the
health of their users to one another to conclude that marijuana should be legal alongside
cigarettes and alcohol.

This is a reasonable argument [3-4] for the following reasons:

1. Countless studies have been done on all three things being compared. The analogy
presented above has a lot of history behind it.
2. If legality is based upon the effect of the marijuana on the health or toxicity to its user, it
certainly falls within precedents set by both cigarettes and alcohol. This is reasonably
cautious.
3. Comparing the effects of marijuana on its users to those who smoke cigarettes and/or
drink alcohol is reasonable since that is how cigarettes and alcohol are regulated and
measured.
4. There may be more to a substances’ legality than its health effects or toxicity, but its
reasonable to think that those criteria may be determining factors as to whether its
legal or not.

Exercise 12

Argument 12 compares the writer’s driving style and usage requirements to those of 4 other
drivers and based upon those requirements and usage, determined that the car he/she
purchased is the right one for him/her.

This is a reasonable argument [3] for the following reasons:

 1. There is a sufficient amount of data. Personally knowing 4 people with the same car is
a pretty good indicator of the experience you will have with a similar car.
2. Drawing a conclusion based on the fact that 2 of the 4 owners are harder on cars is even
more confidence inspiring, in addition to the 2 who don’t drive them hard but have had
reliable service. This is a cautious conclusion.
3. While the options listed (color, seats, gauges, and rear-defroster) have nothing to do
with whether this will be a good car, the comparison to the hard-driven, high mileage
examples of the same car give a good indicator that this will be dependable
transportation that will not cost the owner a lot in maintenance.
4. The conclusion that this car will be a well-built machine is easily reached based upon the
experiences of those who’ve driven them new, used, hard and high mileage.

Exercise 26

Argument 26 compares the life of a terminally ill patient to a failing business, in that a business
that is failing shouldn’t have to stay open until the money is gone, and neither should a person
have to remain alive until all the life is drained from them.

This is a weak argument [1] for the following reasons:

1. This is a conceptual analogy.

2. The conclusion is incautious, as terminally ill can mean many things. Are there
procedures that can prolong the life? Are cures being sought? How long does the
patient have? Can the business turn things around with an influx of cash or a shift in
mission? All these are questions that muddy the results of the analogy.
3. The similarities between the failing business and the terminally ill patient are tenuous at
best, and totally false at their worst.
4. There are too many questions, too few similarities and a questionable conclusion to
present this as an argument for a patients autonomy in regards to end-of-life decisions.

Chris’s analogical argument

My Aston Martin is an excellent car, and it is British. It’s a sports car with a long hood, low
slung seats, a powerful V12 engine and a small trunk. I am considering purchasing another
British car, the Jaguar XJSV12. I will like it because it is a British sports car with a long hood, low
slung seats, a powerful V12 engine and a small trunk.

Chris’s argument compares his Aston Martin to a Jaguar XJSV12 and comes to the conclusion
that based upon the similarities, he will like the Jaguar.

This is a solid argument [3] for the following reasons:

1. They have enough similarities in the things he appreciates in a car he already owns.
2. The conclusion is incautious, as he states he will like it based solely on those attributes.
There are many other factors, including whether he can fit his 6’4” frame into the car
comfortably.
3. The similarities, at least on paper are relevant to the idea that he will like the car
because he likes those things about a car he already owns.
4. Considering the many attributes that the two cars share, it would be difficult to
conclude that he wouldn’t like the Jaguar as much as he likes the Aston Martin.