MLS 570
Critical Thinking
Reading Notes
Fogelin: The Language of Argument
Fall Term 2006
North Central College
The Language of Argument:
will cover the following
 The basic structure of arguments:


“If-then: statements


Are not arguments, but can be part of an
argument and may even imply one.
Validity, Truth & Soundness


Reason & Conclusion “markers” act as signals for
premises and conclusions
Makes sure the argument is a good one – with a
valid structure and [actually] true premises.
Assuring & Guarding

Ways we protect our arguments.
The basic structure of arguments:


A group of sentences is not an argument unless some
of the statements are offered as reasons in support of
another statement.
Reasons and Conclusions are “signaled” by
“markers”.



Reason Markers include: since, because, for
Conclusion Markers include: therefore, thus, so, then,
hence, accordingly
Note: these words are not always used as argument
markers, for example: “since” and “then” can be used as
indicators of time and “for” can be used as a preposition.
Other “signals” for arguments






From which it follows that …
From which we may conclude that …
From which we see that …
Which goes to show that …
Which establishes that …
You can also use “argumentative performatives” to
signal reasons and conclusions.


I conclude that …
I offer the following as evidence that …
If . . . Then . . . conditionals


Often occur in arguments, but are not by
themselves an argument.
They have two parts


The antecedent is the part between the “if” and
the “then” – If Mayor Daley runs again, then he
will be re-elected.
The consequent is what follows the “then” -- If
Mayor Daley runs again, then he will be reelected.
Conditional vs. Argument

Conditional: If you work hard then you will
be promoted.


Argument: Since you will work hard you will
be promoted.


This is not an argument because we are not
making the claim that the antecedent is true.
This IS an argument. You are asserting the truth
of what follows “since.”
If … then … statements may appear in an
argument, but they are not arguments in
themselves, nor is “if… then…” an argument
“marker”.
What is the connection between
conditionals and arguments?

Indicative conditionals provide a pattern that
can be converted into an argument whenever
the antecedent of the “if… then” statement is
taken to be true.

If international terrorism continues to grow, [then]
there will be a worldwide crisis. But international
terrorism will certainly continue to grow, so a
world crisis is on the way.

Remember that “so” is a conclusion marker.
Standard Argument Form
If international terrorism continues to grow, then there will be
a worldwide crisis.
International terrorism will certainly continue to grow.
so a world crisis is on the way.
is the shorthand for signaling a conclusion
Some examples from Ex 1.
Validity, Truth & Soundness

An argument is valid if and only if it is not
possible for all of its premises to be true
while the conclusion is false.


Its conclusion MUST be true if all its premises
are true.
This keeps us from reasoning from truth to
falsity.
Examples
Truth & Soundness

Validity is necessary for an argument to be good.




but we also must take the actual TRUTH of the statements
into account
Why? Because an argument can be valid even when some
of the statements are actually false
So we also require that the premises be ACTUALLY
true. [Remember we only assume them true to
determine validity]
For an argument to be SOUND two criteria must be
met:


The argument must be valid. [There is no way the
conclusion can be false if assume premises are true]
The premises must be true.
How do we keep our arguments to a
manageable size?

To prevent having to put forth an argument for every
premise, and then an argument for every premise in
THAT argument, and then … – you get the idea.
 We refer to various shared beliefs.
 We use other strategies including
 Assuring others that there are backup reasons
 Guarding our claims by weakening them
 Discounting possible criticisms by
anticipating and dismissing them.
Assuring: the ways we do it!





We cite authorities
 Recent studies have shown …
We comment on the strength of our own belief.
 I’m certain that
We abuse the audience.
 Everyone with any sense agrees that …
We can also give assurances that something is false.
 It is no longer held that …
 No one seriously maintains that … [abusive]
The use of assurances should follow the
conversational rule of Quality.
Guarding:
Reducing our claim to something less strong

There are 3 ways to weaken our claims




Extent: Retreat from saying “all” to “most” to
“some” etc…
Probability: Use phrases such as – “It is virtually
certain that …, “It is likely that …”
Cognitive State: Rather that “I know that…” say
“I believe that…” or [using two ways!] “I tend to
believe that …”
Watch out for misuses …
Discounting: Citing a possible criticism in
order to reject or counter it.

How this works
 “The ring is beautiful, but expensive.” – a reason
for not buying the ring.
 “The ring is expensive, but beautiful – a reason
for buying the ring.
 Format:





The assertion of A
The assertion of B
The suggestion of some opposition between A & B.
The indication that the truth of B is more important
than the truth of A.
Useful when facts point in different directions –
can be abused.
Argumentative Performatives

These are when performatives are used to
make a move in an argument.






I conclude that …
I base my argument on the claim that …
I deny such and such …
I concede the point …
I reserve comment …
Some uses are signals, others are tactical.
The Language of Argument

In conclusion …

Be sure you understand Validity and Soundness.


Know the difference between Assuring,
Guarding and Discounting.


Can you recognize & write arguments that are Valid?
Invalid? Valid, but not sound? Sound?
Understand their [good] uses and abuses.
Understand how Argumentative Performatives
help to organize an argument.