Revision (content from lecture #5)

Question 1

DEF argument

Answer 1

A form of thinking in which certain reasons (i.e., premises) are offered to support a conclusion.

Eg.
Reason: Marijuana is less likely to excite violence than alcohol
Reason: Moderate marijuana use is less damaging to the lungs than tobacco
Reason: Legalisation of marijuana would allow for taxation
Conclusion: Therefore, marijuana should be legalised

Question 2

Purpose of arguments

Answer 2

Purpose of arguments:

Decide
Reason: I’ve always been interested in human behaviour
Reason: Psychology is a diverse field with many job opportunities
Conclusion: I will apply to study psychology at university

Explain
Reason: I did not commence working on my assignment until Monday night
Reason: I had a headache all day Tuesday
Conclusion: Therefore, I did not submit my assignment by the due date of Wednesday

Predict
Reason: If I wake up at 7am I can catch the 8am bus to uni
Reason: If I catch the 8am bus I arrive at uni on time
Conclusion: It follows that if I set my alarm for 7am I will arrive at uni on time tomorrow morning

Persuade
Reason: Research has linked smoking cigarettes to lung cancer
Reason: Products known to be bad for our health should not be legalised
Conclusion: Therefore, cigarettes should not be legalised

Question 3

Evaluating Arguments

Answer 3

Truth:

How true are the supporting reasons?
E.g., is there any evidence offered?, can the source be trusted?

Validity:

Do the reasons support the conclusion?

• Valid argument
  
  • -> When reasons support the conclusion so that the conclusion follows from the reasons offered
• Invalid argument
• -> When reasons do not support the conclusion so that the conclusion does not follow from the reasons offered

Validity is a property of the arguments structure

Question 4

Evaluating the soundness of arguments (sound)

Answer 4

• true reasons and valid structure

Question 5

Evaluating the soundness of arguments (unsound)

Answer 5

• False reasons or invalid structure

Question 6

Deductive Reasoning

Answer 6

Reasoning from premises (i.e., reasons) known or assumed to be true to a conclusion that follows necessarily from these premises

Top-down approach

• -> Reason from a general principle to a specific conclusion
• -> Theories used to make specific predictions (i.e., hypotheses)

Question 7

Research V Clinical

Answer 7

Research- hypothesis

Clinical- what the patient has, diagnosing patients

Question 8

Syllogisms

Answer 8

Argument form that consists of two supporting premises and a conclusion (ABC)

Valid forms:

• Application of a general rule
• Modus ponens
• Modus tollens
• Disjunctive syllogism

Question 9

Modus Ponens

Answer 9

Affirming the antecedent

Premise: If A, then B
Premise: A
Conclusion: Therefore, B

Premise: If I have prepared thoroughly for the exam, then I will do well
Premise: I prepared thoroughly for the exam
Conclusion: Therefore, I will do well on the exam

Question 10

Modus Tollens

Answer 10

Denying the Consequence

Premise: If A, then B
Premise: Not B
Conclusion: Therefore, not A

Premise: If I want to do well in PSYC105 then I will pay attention to the lecture
Premise: I am not paying attention to the lecture
Conclusion: Therefore, I do not want to do well in PSYC105

Question 11

Application of general Rule

Answer 11

Premise: All A are B
Premise: C is an A
Conclusion: Therefore, C is B

Premise: All politicians are 
untrustworthy
Premise: Tony Abbott is a 
politician
Conclusion: Therefore, Tony 
Abbott is untrustworthy

Question 12

Disjunctive Syllogism

Answer 12

Premise: Either A or B
Premise: Not A
Conclusion: Therefore, B

Premise: Either I catch the bus to uni or I drive
Premise: I did not catch the bus
Conclusion: Therefore, I drove to uni

Question 13

Constructing Arguments

Answer 13

What is the conclusion for the argument?

List opposing points of view to support/refute this

Find evidence for each point of view above

Ask questions about points not covered

Discuss to increase understanding, not to “win” the argument – be wary of emotive terms

Question 14

Toulmin Model of Argumentation

Answer 14

Claim
The statement being argued (thesis)

Evidence
Specific facts or data that support the claim

Warrant (reasoning) (how)
Explanation of why or how the evidence supports the claim

Counterclaim
A claim that disagrees with the thesis/claim

Rebuttal
Evidence that negates or disagrees with the counterclaim