TEST #3

Question 1

principle of charity

Answer 1

we must interpret the author’s argument in a fair way

we must make the argument as strong as possible without twisting their word and staying consistent with what the speaker had in mind

when reconstructing an argument, make sure:
1) the premises are reasonable for the author
2) the argument is well-formed for the author
3) the argument is undefeated (in cogency cases)

Question 2

principle of charitable interpretation

Answer 2

has to do with implicit premises

when adding implicit premises, add ones that are reasonable to believe rather than ones that are obviously false, and ones that are consistent with what the author had in mind

Question 3

deductive strength

Answer 3

1. argument is valid
2. reasonable to believe all the premises are true, based on available evidence (doesn’t say anything about the truth-value)

it is unreasonable to disbelieve the conclusion.

recall principle of proportional belief

if the premises of a valid argument are known to be true, then the conclusion is also known to be true

the premises can fail to be reasonable to be true by the available evidence making it r/j/r to believe the claim is false or to suspend judgment.

falibilism still exists! an arg. can be deductively strong but the conclusion is false

Question 4

inductive strength

Answer 4

1. argument is cogent
2. all premises are reasonable to believe, based on evidence
3. argument is not defeated by persons total evidence

it is unreasonable to disbelieve the conclusion of an inductively strong argument

DEFEATED ARGUMENT: when some other evidence provides good reason to believe the conclusion is false or should suspend judgment about it
- if the current premises mixed with the additional premises/information doesn’t support the conclusion

Question 5

conclusion indicators

Answer 5

therefore

thus

hence

entails

implies

… follows that

Question 6

premise indicators

Question 7

deductive/inductive weakness

Answer 7

when an argument doesn’t meet one or all the requirements for strength

e.g. can be valid but not reasonable

e.g. can be reasonable but not cogent

Question 8

strength for one person but not for another

Answer 8

depends on the evidence available to each person. certain evidence makes it reasonable for one person to believe the premises to be reasonable, whereas other evidence makes the premises unreasonable to believe for another person.

Question 9

strength at one time but not another

Answer 9

a person may gain/lose evidence overtime; at one time the evidence makes it reasonable to believe the premises, at another it does not

Question 10

strength and proprotional belief

Answer 10

proportion the strength of your belief of the premises to be true to the evidence available:
the stronger the evidence for the premises, the mroe reasonable it is to believe them
if it is r/j/r to believe the premises of a valid argument are true, then it is r/j/r to believe that the conclusion is true as well

r/j/r comes in degrees. so the more r/j/r it is to believe the premises of a valid argument are true, the more reasonable it is to believe the conclusion is true as well
(if theres a lot of evidence that premises of a valid argument are true, then you should believe with great strength that the conclusion is true too)

Question 11

sound arguments vs strong arguments

Answer 11

SOUND ARGUMENTS: valid arguments with true premises (independent of rational thought)

STRONG ARGUMENTS: valid arguments that depend on how reasonable it is to believe the conclusion

Question 12

circular arguments

Answer 12

arguments with the same premise and conclusion

valid but weak since they’re unjustified

Question 13

ways in which a valid/cogent argument can fail to be strong for you

Answer 13

the available evidence gives reason to suspend judgement or disbelieve the truth of the premises

Question 14

reminder

Answer 14

in valid arguments, the premises provide CONCLUSIVE evidence for the conclusion (if the premises are reasonable, then so is the conclusion)

cogent arguments do not have conclusive evidence (the premises always leave some room for the conclusion to be false)

Question 15

can a deductively strong argument be defeated?

Answer 15

no because the premises guarantee the truth of the conclusion 100%,s o noa dditional evidence can sway that

Question 16

reconstructing argument

Answer 16

putting it into standard form

purpose: to identify premises and conclusion and understand/evaluate the argument properly and deem them either good or poor and deem the truth

Question 17

recognize arguments

Answer 17

look for conclusion (main point)

look for premises (reasons offered for the truth of a claim)

stay clear of rhetorical writing and descriptive writing.

if the author actually PROVIDES REASON for their argument, then it is argumentative writing

Question 18

generalizations

Answer 18

premises that state facts about general categories/groups of people

UNIVERSAL generalization
“all As are Bs”

NONUNIVERSAL generalization
“most As are Bs”

WIDE GENERALIZATION
“all lawyers”

NARROW GENERALIZATION
“all female lawyers”

Question 19

quantifiers

Answer 19

amount in a generalization

“all” “most” “some”

if you believe the author meant to us an “all” then use it, but if you think the author meant something more modest then use modest quantifiers!

Question 20

cheap validity + adding a linking premise

Answer 20

turn an ill-formed argument into valid by adding a CONDITIONAL linking premise that connects the premises and conclusion together

LINKING PREMISE: premise that connects the stated premsie to the conclusion

remember, adding a premise doesn’t make it strong/good, just valid.

Question 21

principle of faithfulness (same thign as principle of charity able interpretastion)

Answer 21

add implicit premises that are reasonable to accept rather than ones that are obviously false

Question 22

generalization principle

Answer 22

when adding an implicit premise that is a generalization, add a TRUE WIDE GENERALIZATION rather than a true narrow generalization, and add a TRUE NARROW GENERALIZATION rather than a false wide generalization….

Question 23

common mistakes in argument reconstruction:

Answer 23

1. improper wording (shifts in wording makes it ill-formed, so make the wording consistent so that its well-formed)
2. missing premises (include implicit/explicit premises + parenthetical justifications)
3. unnecessary premises (non-argumentative material) (you can either use it to support the conclusion by adding an implicit premise or eliminate it)

Question 24

steps of argument analysis

Answer 24

1. decide if its an argument
2. reconstruct the argument (identify conclusion + identify premises + if its ill-formed then add implicit premises)
3. fine-tune the reconstruction (clarify wording + add missing premises + remove unnecessary premises)

Question 25

so basically, adding an implicit premise…

Answer 25

• is following the principle of charitable interpretation
• are used to switch an ill-formed argument to a well-formed one (follow a pattern)