Chapter 4 for final exam 2.pdf

Becoming a Critical Thinker by Sarah Ivory  Chapter 4 Quality of Argument The three aims of critical thinking: Quality of Argument ‫…يجري التحميل‬ Critical Thinking Strength of Evidence Clarity of Communication  INTRODUCTION...

Becoming a Critical Thinker by Sarah Ivory  Chapter 4 Quality of Argument The three aims of critical thinking: Quality of Argument ‫…يجري التحميل‬ Critical Thinking Strength of Evidence Clarity of Communication  INTRODUCTION One of the most common issues students face at university is not developing their own arguments. There are three main reasons for this: 1/ not realizing that this is what is expected of them 2/ not knowing what an argument is 3/ not knowing how to develop an argument.  What the meaning of Argument? ‫…يجري التحميل‬ Argument: Group of statements intended to prove or support another statement. Statement: Sentence that can be viewed as either true or false  Which one is a statement ? Examples Red is a color Abortion is morally wrong Canada is in South America Don’t you know smoking will kill you?  Components of an argument: Making an argument is adopting a position or stance on a topic and supporting that with reasons. We might then use our argument to try to convince or persuade someone. A more technical approach to understanding an argument' is to consider the three necessary components: A claim (position or 'answer") At least one premise (reason) A link (connection between the claim and premise) all three components need to be present for an argument to exist, in some cases these may be implicit or unsaid.  Components of an argument: The claim is the position or stance we are taking. Where we have been asked a question, it is our ultimate answer to that question. A premise provides the reason to support the claim. Premises: Statements in an argument offered as evidence or reasons. At least one premise (reason). A link (connection between the claim and premise) Presenting a claim and a premise is still not an argument, until we have demonstrated the link The primary functions of the link is to demonstrate how the claim is associated with the premise.  Components of an argument: Bringing these three components together we can present a simple argument in response to this question: Question: Other than the formal curriculum, what else is important in a university degree? Argument: In a university degree, students should be exposed to a range of world view and cultures ( Claim) because (Link) this will contribute to their critical thinking (premise) The claim is the answer to the question, and the premise is the reason which supports the claim. This is a simple argument which contains one premise and one claim, and these are linked.  EXERCISE Determine whether the following are, or are not, arguments. Identify (if present), the claim, the premise(s), and the link. 1. Jane Austen's character 'Emma' is young, rich, and bored. 2. Because prisoners can learn from each other in prison, sending first time offenders to prison can actually increase reoffending rates.  LOGICAL REASONING Critical thinker relies primarily on logos which is defined as the logic of the underlying argument The logos is the logical reasoning of the argument. ‫…يجري التحميل‬ This reflects the relationship between a premise (or multiple premises) and the claim Flaws in logical reasoning result in weak arguments. There may be a number of different flaws including non sequiturs (the claim doesn't follow from the premise) or inconsistencies (there is a contradiction between the claim and the premises) >>These are called logical fallacies. Consider this example: 1- It was the best cookbook because the cover was green, and the text was black 2- John will be a good student because he loves cheese Consider this example: 1- It was the best cookbook because the cover was green, and the text was black This has all the necessary components of an argument: a claim, a premise, and a link. But it just doesn't make sense how can the colors determine whether it is the best cookbook? 2- John will be a good student because he loves cheese There appears to be a flaw in the logical reasoning of this argument (the claim doesn't make sense given the premise). A quality argument does not contain flaws in logical reasoning and avoids leaps of logic.  Mastering the basics: claims, links, and premises: 1. Claim: the position, stance, or contention of the argument. Also, the answer to the question being asked. To determine if a statement could be a claim, ask 'But why?' and see if the response makes sense. It may be implicit (but you should make your claims explicit) 2- Link: Relationship between the claim and the premise(s). simply use indicators words like 'therefore' or 'because’. A link turns two statements into an argument and explains the logical reasoning between those statements.  Claim indicators : are words which indicate that a claim is about to follow. Some common ones include: therefore, thus, so, as a consequence, this shows that, this suggests that, this implies that, this proves that, consequently, accordingly, and nonetheless (often used when rebutting a counter argument ) Premise indicators : are words which indicate that a premise is about to be offered. Some common ones include: because, since, for, in view of, and given that.  Mastering the basics: claims, links, and premises: 3- Premise(s): Provide justification for accepting the claim Key element to determining the quality of the argument. A claim without premises is not an argument: it is just a statement. Things to avoid: categorical premises, vague premises, or premises appealing to emotion it can lead our audience to assume that we are incorrect, or possibly biased.  Example of Categorical premises : All CEOs are self-interested therefore employees are underpaid Can we prove that all CEOs are self-interested? Unlikely no modify the premise in the argument above in this way: Many CEOs are self-interested therefore employees are underpaid Replacing 'all' with 'many’ This premise may still not be accurate, but it is more believable that 'many' CEOs are self-interested than that 'all' CEOs are. Mastering the basics: claims, links, and premises: Vague premises lack detail or clarity. The logical reasoning in the argument is unclear and our audience may struggle to understand Example : Poor people are disconnected therefore economic instability Reasoning in the argument is unclear. To address vague premises, we usually just need to provide more detail. Poor people are disconnected from government departments and charities that can support them in times of economic hardship is therefore instability disproportionately affects poor people.  Mastering the basics: claims, links, and premises: Premises appealing to emotion should be avoided. critical thinkers rely on logical reasoning to develop arguments. Premises which appeal to emotion are relying on pathos. Example: You shouldn’t give me an F in the class just because I failed all the exams. I had a rough semester. A grade is deserved by achievement, not by circumstance  Introducing complexity and using argument maps It is rare that an argument will provide just one premise. What is more likely, is that there will be many premises which are all related in different ways or performing different functions within the overall argument. Additional components of an argument: Supporting Premises: Premises presented to support, not the claim, but the direct premise to the claim. Adding support premises creates a chained argument.  Additional components of an argument Counter arguments: Premises which do not support our claim counter arguments may occur to our audience as they are evaluating our argument. Incorporating counter-arguments into your argument is a way of strengthening your argument, not weakening it. Acknowledging the existence and even the strengths of counterarguments, demonstrate that understand the complexity of the topic that has been are exploring. We can then offer a rebuttal-an explanation for why the counter argument is not valid or does not weaken our original argument.  Additional components of an argument Rebuttals: Responses explaining why the counterargument is either not valid or does not weaken the main argument. On the Rebuttals : counter-counterarguments reasons why the counterarguments are wrong reasons why your claim is better than the counterarguments Example: This table shows an argument, counter-argument, and one possible rebuttal to this counter-argument: Arguments Counter-argument Rebuttal The primary focus of Terminally ill patients are Depression can be managed. medical end-of-life decisions likely to be depressed, and, The relevance of depression should be on patient consent, therefore, unable to consent must be made on a case-by- rather than the doctor's to their hastened death in a case basis. Depression does intention because it is not a balanced or acceptable way. not warrant a general rule breach of a patient's rights if prohibiting patients from s/he consents to the consenting to a hastened termination of their life. death. Argument Maps: Argument maps depict an argument visually by using box and arrow diagrams to distinguish between different components. Research has shown argument mapping enhances critical thinking performance (Dwyer et al., 2012; van Gelder, 2015). Argument Maps: FIGURE 4.1 Six steps for developing an argument  Six Step to developing an argument: Step one: List the likely claims : first step is to start by listing likely claims: likely answers to the question. Some questions can be quite open with a number of likely answers. Example : 'What is the best political system to promote social stability?” Step two: Brainstorm possible premises : Having listed the likely claims, brainstorming is an opportunity to note down premises which support each claim. Step three: Evaluate and improve the quality of premises : A good way to do this is to use THE three guidelines for quality premises: avoid categorical premises, avoid vague premises, and avoid premises appealing to emotion.  Six Step to developing an argument: Step four: Identify the primary issue: This step involves identifying the primary issue in the list which we judge. identifying what we judge to be the primary issue gives us the main premise around which we can construct our argument. Deciding on the primary issue requires our own reasoning and judgement. Step five: Make your argument: develop a quality argument using the premises we have brainstormed and then improved. Step six: Add a counter argument : a counter argument most commonly disputes the premise or the link to the claim. give an example of each here.