Argument Patterns

Argument Patterns
Example of a valid argument
A valid argument is a list of premises from which the
conclusion follows
If the job is worth doing, then it's worth doing well.
The job is worth doing.
Therefore, it's worth doing well.
We can write it as
If p, then q.
p.
Therefore, q.
 Argument Patterns
If I do the assignment then my teacher will be
happy with me
I do the assignment
Therefore, my teacher is happy with me
This can also be written as
If p then q
P
Therefore q.
 Argument Patterns
• first line in the argument is a compound statement
– it's composed of at least two constituent statements,
represented by p and q.
– We can plug any statements we want into this form,
and we will still get a valid argument.
• The first statement in a conditional premise (the if
part) is known as the antecedent. The second
statement (the then part) is known as the
consequent.
 common argument patterns
Affirming the antecedent

1. MODUS PONENS or AFFIRMING THE ANTECEDENT

• Example

If the job is worth doing, then it's worth doing well.

The job is worth doing.
Therefore, it's worth doing well.
Or
If p, then q.
p.
Therefore, q.
– modus ponens form is valid-if the premises are true, the conclusion absolutely
must be true.
– if "If p, then q" and "p"
 AFFIRMING THE CONSEQUENT

2. AFFIRMING THE CONSEQUENT

• Example
If Buffalo is the capital of New York, then Buffalo is in New York.
Buffalo is in New York.
Therefore, Buffalo is the capital of New York.
Or
If p, then q.
q.
Therefore, p.
• In valid conditional argument form
• If the premises is all true even then the premises is wrong. So the premises does
not guarantee the truth of the conclusion
• Even though this is a faulty pattern, it is common enough that it also has acquired a
name.
 AFFIRMING THE CONSEQUENT
• Example
If I have flu then I will have fever
I have a fever
Therefore I have a flu
A fever does not guarantee having a flu
 MODUS TOLLENS
3. MODUS TOLLENS ( mode of denying) or DENYING THE CONSEQUENT
• Example
If Austin is happy, then Barb is happy.
Barb is not happy.
Therefore, Austin is not happy.
Or
If p, then q.
Not q.
Therefore, not p.
– Like modus ponens, modus tollens is always valid.
• If the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.
• So any argument that's in the modus tollens pattern is valid.
• Denying the consequent by denying the antecedent
 MODUS TOLLENS
• Example
If the match is lit then there is Oxygen in the
room
There is no Oxygen in the room
Therefore the match is not lit.
• Conditional If A then B
• Contrapositive If not-A then not-B
– These two are equivalent
 DENYING THE ANTECEDENT
(Faulty)
4. DENYING THE ANTECEDENT
Example
If Einstein invented the steam engine, then he's a great scientist.
Einstein did not invent the steam engine.
Therefore, he is not a great scientist.
Or
If p, then q.
Not p.
Therefore, not q.
• denying the antecedent is clearly an invalid conditional pattern:
 DENYING THE ANTECEDENT
• Example
If the grass is wet then it rained last night
If the grass is not wet
Therefore it did not rain last night
These premises do not guarantee the truth of the
conclusion
Other forms of arguments
Other forms of Arguments
Other forms of Arguments
 Diagramming an Argument

• When arguments are more complex/difficult to

sort out
• premises from conclusions
• argument parts from non- argumentative background noise
• Becomes easy if ,visualize an argument‘s structure
1. Underline (or circle) any premise or conclusion indicator
words (e.g., "therefore," "since," and "because").
2. Next we number all the statements (and only the
statements) in the passage in sequential order.
3. Draw a wavy underline under conclusion and underline the
premises
4. Finally, we draw the diagram.
Independent and Dependent Premises

• An independent premise offers support to a

conclusion without the help of any other
premises. If other premises are omitted or
undermined in an argument support supplied
by an independent premise does not change.
• Dependent premises, depend on each other
to jointly provide support to a conclusion.
 Assessing Long Arguments
• three obstacles
1. Only a small portion of the prose may contain
statements that serve as the premises and
conclusion.
2. The premises or conclusion may be implicit.
3. Many longer works purporting to be filled
with arguments contain very few arguments
or none at all.
 A four-step procedure

1. Study the text until thoroughly understood

2. Find the conclusion. There may be several main
conclusions or one primary conclusion with several
sub conclusions.
3. Identify the premises, disregard extraneous material,
keep eye on the big picture. At this stage you
shouldn't try to incorporate the details of evidence
into the premises, though you must take them into
account to fully understand the argument.
4. Diagram the argument.
 Example
• There is no question in my mind. I therefore
maintain that Colonel Mustard is the murderer.
Because if he did it, he would probably have blood
stains on the sleeve of his shirt. The blood stains are
tiny, but they are there. Any observant person could
see them. Also the murder weapon was within the
colonel‘s reach for quite a while before the crime
was committed. And since of all the people in the
house at the time he alone does not have an airtight
alibi, he must be the killer.
 Example
1.There is no question in my mind. 2. I therefore
maintain that Colonel Mustard is the murderer. 3
Because if he did it, he would probably have blood
stains on the sleeve of his shirt. 4. The blood stains
are tiny, but they are there. 5. Any observant person
could see them. 6. Also the murder weapon was
within the colonel‘s reach for quite a while before
the crime was committed.7. And since of all the
people in the house at the time he alone does not
have an airtight alibi, he must be the killer.
 Example
• we cross out all extraneous statements
• those that are neither premises nor
conclusions
• those that are redundant
• those that are nothing more than background
information or other logically irrelevant
material.
 Example
(1) There is no question in my mind. (2) I there fore
maintain that Colonel Mustard is the killer (3)
Because if he did it, he would probably have blood
stains on the sleeve of his shirt. (4) The blood stains
are tiny. but they are there. (5) Any observant
person could see them. (6) Also the murder weapon
was within the colonel’s reach/or quite a while
before the crime was committed. (7) And since of all
the people in the house at the time he alone does
not have an airtight alibi, he must be the killer.
Example