RECOGNIZING

ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
◦ Are series of propositions which one is claimed to be supported from the
others.
 RECOGNIZE IT
◦ In order to be an argument, a passage must set out to prove something.
– Requirements for proving something:
1) At least one statement must claim to present evidence or reasons.
2) There must be a claim that something follows from the evidence, that the evidence implies something.

Statements + Claim = Argument

(Premises) (Conclusion)

-a passage must contain factual and inferential claim to be an argument

◦ 1. Premise and conclusion indicator words.
◦ 2. The presence of an inferential relationship between the statements.
Explicit Inferential Claims
◦ Example:
“Mad cow disease is spread by feeding parts of infected animals to cows, and this practice has
yet to be completely eradicated. Thus, mad cow disease continues to pose a threat to people who
eat beef”

Thus – A conclusion indicator.

 Implicit Inferential Claim
◦ Example:
“The genetic modification of food is risky business. Genetic engineering can introduce unintended
changes into the DNA of the food-producing organism, and these changes can be toxic to the
consumer”

no indicator words used.

Conclusion Indicator
◦ Partial List of Conclusion Indicators:
 
◦ therefore for these reasons
◦ hence it follows that
◦ so I conclude that
◦ accordingly which shows that
◦ in consequence which means that
◦ consequently which entails that
◦ proves that which implies that
◦ as a result which allows us to infer that
◦ for this reason which points to the conclusion that
◦ thus we may infer
◦ Example:
1. “No man will take counsel, but every man will take money; therefore money is better than
counsel.” (Source: Jonathan Swift)

THEREFORE
Premise Indicator
◦ Partial List of Premise Indicator

◦ since as indicated by
◦ because the reason is that
◦ for for the reason that
◦ as may be inferred from
◦ follows from may be derived from
◦ as shown by may be deduced from
◦ inasmuch as in view of the fact that
Example:
Since carrots are full of vitamins, it follows that your body will benefit if you eat them.

SINCE
Arguments in Context
◦ Sometimes there will be no indicators used at all.

Example:
Carrots have significant vitamin content, according to research. Eating them will benefit your
body
Premises or Conclusion Not in Declarative
Form
◦ Interrogative Sentence can serve as a premise when its question is rhetorical

Rhetorical Question

Example: I am irked by the new set of coins being issued. While some first ladies have
influenced our country, should we bestow this honor on people who are unelected, whose only
credential is having a prominent spouse?
Unstated Propositions
◦ Enthymeme

Illustration:
“Where there is smoke, there is fire,”
(The smoke is caused by the fire)
He is a Filipino citizen, so he is entitled to due process.
(All Filipino citizen are entitled to due process)
He could not have committed this heinous crime. I have known him since he was a child.
(He is innocent by nature and, therefore, could never be a criminal.)
Arguments and Explanation
◦ Explanation is a group of statements that try to shed light on an event or an occurrence. These
occurrence are usually things that are commonly accepted.
*Consist of an explanan and an explanandum.

An argument or an explanation depends on the purpose to be served by it.

“Q because P.”
Illustration
1. Lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where
thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
—Matt. 7:19
-ARGUMENT
2. Therefore is the name of it [the tower] called Babel; because the Lord did there confound the
language of all the earth.
—Gen. 11:19
-EXPLANATION
Deductive and Inductive Argument
◦ A deductive argument makes the claim that its conclusion is supported by its premises
conclusively

◦ An inductive argument, in contrast, does not make such a claim.

Deductive Argument:
If all humans are mortal and Socrates is human, we may conclude without reservation that Socrates
is mortal
Inductive Argument:
-Most corporation lawyers are conservatives.
-Miriam Graf is a corporation lawyer.
-Therefore Miriam Graf is probably a conservative.
Suppose we also learn that
-Miriam Graf is an officer of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
and suppose we add the (true) premise that
-Most officers of the ACLU are not conservatives.
Now the conclusion (that Miriam Graf is a conservative) no longer seems very probable; the original
inductive argument has been greatly weakened by the presence of this additional information about
Miriam Graf.