SMU Classification: Restricted

LESSON ONE

The course is an introduction to argument and reasoning. The word “argument” has
several meaning in ordinary speech. It can mean:

(1) An angry exchange of opinions

(2) A discussion or debate
(3) A reason or set of reasons given in support of a claim or an action

In this course, we will deal exclusively with arguments in sense (3). More specifically,
our concern is with the use of arguments in determining what to do and what to
believe. When used properly, arguments can help us decide whether a belief is true
or false. They can also help us determine the best course of action or the right thing
to do in a given circumstance.

The topics covered in this course include deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning,
moral reasoning, practical reasoning, and various common fallacies.

Course learning outcomes

At the end of the course, you are expected to be able to do the following things:

(a) Breakdown an argument into its component parts

(b) Identify missing assumptions in an argument
(c) Determine whether an inference is valid or invalid, weak or strong
(d) Challenge assumptions with counterexamples
(e) Spot ambiguities, inconsistencies and mistakes in reasoning (fallacies)
(f) Construct logically valid arguments

Arguments and their parts

An argument is a set of reasons offered in support of a proposition or claim. For the

purpose of this course, we will take propositions to be sentences that can be true or
false. Below are some examples of propositions:

1. A whale is a fish
2. Coffee drinking lowers the risk of cancer
3. The increase in CO2 is the main cause of global warming
4. Some machines can think
5. There is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe
6. Every number greater than two is the sum of two prime numbers
7. All moral judgments are relative

1
 SMU Classification: Restricted

Each of these sentences is either true or false. Below are some sentences that are
not propositions:

1. Always wear a safety helmet when you are at a worksite

2. Is there life after death?
3. Please close the door
4. I declare the Games open
5. If you want more information about our company, visit our website
6. We will find the culprit who did this

Every proposition makes a claim about the world. A proposition is true if what it
claims corresponds to the way things are, and it is false otherwise. For example, the
proposition “There is a law school in SMU” is true as SMU does have a law school,
while the proposition “There are at most 30 stations on the Downtown Line” is false
as the Downtown Line has more than 30 stations (34 in fact). Thus, whether a
proposition is true or false is an objective matter in that it does not depend on what
we believe; it is also absolute in that it is the same for everyone.

A proposition on its own is not an argument, although it can be part of an argument.

To argue for a proposition, we need to show that the proposition is supported by
other propositions that we know to be true. When the proposition is taken together
with the supporting propositions, we have an argument. Consider the proposition

No machines can think.

What other propositions (reasons) can we give to support this proposition? Below is
one possible answer:

Thinking is a conscious process

No machines have consciousness.

If we offer these two propositions as reasons for the initial proposition, we have an
argument:

All things that can think must have consciousness. No machines have
consciousness. Therefore, no machines can think

This simple argument contains the basic structure of every argument:

R and S are true; therefore, P is true

Or
P is true because R and S are true

2
 SMU Classification: Restricted

In every argument, you will find the following three things:

(1) The proposition that is being established (No machines can think) = the
conclusion P

(2) The supporting reasons for the conclusion (Thinking is a conscious process;
No machines have consciousness) = premises R and S

(3) The inference from premises to conclusion (expressed by words like

’therefore’ and ‘because’)

Arguments can be good or bad. In a good argument, the conclusion is supported by

premises that are factually true. This gives us the assurance that the conclusion is
true or likely to be true. In a bad argument, the conclusion is either not supported by
the premises or the premises are not factually true. Bad arguments give us no
reason to think that the conclusion is true or likely to be true.

For exercise, try giving a simple two-premise argument for or against each of the
following propositions:

1. Dolphins are not fish

2. Whales are mammals
3. The earth rotates around its axis
4. Ghosts do not exist

Besides arguing about what to believe, we also argue about what to do:

1. You should not put all your money in a saving account

2. The study of history should be made compulsory in our schools
3. Animals should not be used for experiments
4. Do not drink and drive
5. Performance enhancing drug should not be allowed in sports
6. Capital punishment should be abolished

These sentences are not true or false because they do not make any claims about
how things are. Rather, they tell us what we should or should not do. Call sentences
like these ‘prescriptive sentences’. We can divide prescriptive sentences into two
kinds – those that express advice and those that express obligations. While some
obligations, such as moral obligations, may be absolute, an advice is always
conditional. For example, “You should not put all your money in a savings account”
should be understood as ‘You should not put all your money in a savings account if
…’ (e.g. if you want to preserve the value of your money’)

3
 SMU Classification: Restricted

Although prescriptions are not true or false, they can be questioned or challenged
(e.g. why should we abolish capital punishment? why should we be kind to animals?)
Such questions can only be answered by giving reasons (e.g. because human
beings have a right to life and capital punishment violates that right). When we
respond in this way, we are arguing for the recommendations or prescriptions.
Therefore, arguments can be given, not only for propositions, but also for
prescriptive sentences.

To sum up:

To argue of a claim is to offer reasons in support of it. Every argument is set of

claims with a structure:

P because Q and R, or
Q and R; therefore P

Every person who offers an argument is making two claims:

First, he is claiming that the truth of the conclusion (P) follows from (or is made
probable by) the truth of the premises (Q, R, etc.). Call this the inferential claim.

Second, he is claiming that all the premises are true.

If a set of propositions does not embody both of these claims, it is not an argument.

Some examples of arguments and non-arguments:

(A) The disagreement over the death penalty will never be resolved.

(B) Gill nets are a common form of commercial fishing. These nets are left drifting
in the sea, the top attached to floats, the bottom weighted down. The nets
take advantage of the streamlined body shape of the fish, which swim into
them and then are caught by the gills or fins, unable to back out.

(C) Most prospective parents would prefer to have sons. Therefore, if people can
choose the sex of their child, it is likely that there will eventually be more
males than females in the population.

(D) Bottled mineral water won’t sell. On a number of occasions, there have been
health alerts about the chemicals found in bottled water. It is absurdly
expensive. In addition, tap-water, which is free, is improving in quality all the
time.

4
 SMU Classification: Restricted

(E) Animals other than human beings do not have basic rights. If they had such
rights, they would, among other things, have to be held accountable for killing
or maiming fellow animals in the wilds.

Comments

An argument must contain at least two propositions (a conclusion and at least one
premise). (A), being a single proposition, is therefore not an argument.

In (B), none of the propositions is claimed to be true on the basis of other

propositions in the passage. Each proposition is self-standing, that is, given as true
independently of the other propositions. Hence, (B) is not an argument as it contains
no inferential claim. Passages that describe facts, provide information, give
instructions, or narrate events, are not arguments.

In (C), the second sentence is claimed to be true, not as a self-standing proposition,

but as a consequence of the first sentence. This inferential claim is expressed by the
word ‘so’. This makes the first sentence a premise and the second sentence the
conclusion. So (C) is an argument.

In (D), there are no inference indicator words. But it is quite obvious that the aim of
the passage is to show that mineral water won’t sell because of a number of
reasons. So there is an inference claim, albeit not explicitly expressed. We can make
this explicit is by adding ‘for the following reasons’ to the end of the first sentence or
‘This is because’ to the beginning of the second. By doing this, we make it clear that
the first sentence is the conclusion of the argument and the rest are premises.

Is (E) an argument? Why or why not?

Arguments, explanations, conditional propositions compared:

(1) Explanations

Seawater is salty because when rain, which is fresh water, falls from clouds onto
land and finds its way into lakes and rivers back to the sea, it picks up salts and
minerals. Once it reaches the sea, the water will be evaporated again to form new
clouds containing fresh water, and the salt is left behind, so over millions of years
the oceans have slowly been accumulating salt washed off the land by fresh
water.

This passage contains an explanation for why seawater is salty. The structure of an
explanation – ‘seawater is salty because x, y, z’ – is similar to an argument.

5
 SMU Classification: Restricted

However, the passage is not an argument. This is because the function of an

argument is to established that a certain proposition is true, but it is not the purpose
of the passage to establish that seawater is salty (that seawater is salty is something
which we already know), but to give the cause of the saltiness.

Both explanations and arguments have the structure

P because Q, R …

One way to distinguish an argument from an explanation is to ask: “Is the truth of P
taken for granted by speaker and audience?” If the answer is YES, the passage
is an explanation. If the answer is NO, the passage is an argument

(2) Conditional propositions

A conditional proposition (‘conditional’ for short) is a sentence of the form ‘If p then
q’, where p and q are both propositions. For example:

(1) If all our actions are determined (p), then we are not morally accountable for them
(q)

(2) If a fetus is a human being (p), then abortion is murder (q)

In a conditional, the q-proposition is claimed to be inferable from the p-proposition. A

conditional therefore makes the same inferential claim as an argument. However,
conditionals are not arguments. This is because in an argument, the propositions
that make up the premises must be claimed to be true, but neither the p-proposition
nor the q-proposition is claimed to true in (1) and (2). Thus, someone who asserts (1)
is not claiming that all our actions are determined, and someone who asserts (2) is
not claiming that a fetus is a human being. The p-proposition in (1) and (2) therefore
does not serve the function of a premise in an argument. For the same reason, the
q-proposition is not to be taken as a conclusion.

Although conditionals by themselves are not arguments, they may appear in

arguments either as premises or as conclusions.

For example, in the argument below the first premise is a conditional proposition:

1. If a fetus is a human being, then abortion is wrong

2. A fetus is a human being
3. Therefore, abortion is wrong

6
 SMU Classification: Restricted

In the argument below, the premises and conclusions are all conditional
propositions:

1. If our actions are determined, then we have no control over them

2. If we have no control over our actions, then we cannot be held morally
responsible for them.
3. Therefore, if our actions are determined, then we cannot be held morally
responsible for them.

This brings us to the end of lesson one. In the next lesson, we will try to answer the
question “How do we determine whether an argument is good or bad?”

What you should know from this lesson:

 What is an argument?
 How to distinguish arguments from non-arguments, e.g. conditional
propositions, explanations, reports, etc.
 What are the parts of an argument?