Elements of Arguments
Workbook
Introduction
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y
As an Advanced Level student you must be able to develop the ability to understand and
evaluate others’ arguments, and to construct arguments of your own. This is the core of the
critical path, and what makes Global Perspectives a particularly useful subject to study.
We are surrounded by attempts to persuade us; we should accept some and reject others.
This part of the course is all about learning to discern which attempts to persuade fall into
which category.
This means first learning to work out what argument is being presented to us. This requires
an understanding of the various elements of arguments, and an ability to read a passage or
listen to a speech and reconstruct its argument.
The second skill involved is assessing the strength of the evidence offered; keeping an eye
out for any logical fallacies that might have been committed.
For the examination it is important to be able to extract an argument from a passage. This
requires comprehension skills, analytic ability, and an understanding of the elements of
arguments.
Once the argument of a passage has been identified, it needs to be assessed. Is the
argument a strong one? To what extent do the reasons offered support the conclusion
drawn? What does the argument assume, and are those assumptions plausible? In short,
should we accept the argument’s conclusion?
Part of this assessment requires an understanding of evidence sampling. If empirical data is
offered as evidence then it is important to consider how it has been gathered. Is there
enough data? Has it been collected from a variety of sources? Is it a random selection or
has it been hand-picked to support a particular perspective?
Also important is a thorough knowledge of logical fallacies. These are common errors of
reasoning that you should be on the look out for. It is important that you know their names,
and can explain what’s wrong with arguments that commit them.
2
Elements of Arguments
An argument is not just a conversation in which two people hurl abuse at each other. Neither
is it the same thing as straightforward disagreement; there’s a difference between arguing
with someone and merely contradicting them.
As Monty Python’s Argument Clinic sketch puts it, an argument is “a collected series of
statements to establish a definite proposition”, an attempt to persuade by offering reasons.
Any statement that attempts to persuade you that something is true by offering at least one
reason for thinking that it is so counts as an argument.
The main Elements of Arguments are thus reasons and a conclusion. The ability to read a
passage and pick out its conclusion and the reasons offered in support of it is perhaps the
most basic skill required for critical thinking.
As you progress to more complicated arguments, you’ll also need to be able to spot
intermediate conclusions and counter-arguments. Indicator words can be helpful in flagging
up how different parts of a passage are functioning in the argument that it contains.
1.
Conclusions
The conclusion of an argument is the main point that it is trying to get you to accept. You’ll
often (but not always) find this statement either at the beginning or the end of a passage. It
may be indicated by a word such as “therefore”, “thus”, or even “in conclusion”.

The Therefore Test
A test that can help you to identify the conclusion of a passage is the ‘therefore test’.
Simply insert the word “therefore” into the passage directly before the phrase that
you think is the conclusion. If the passage makes sense, then you’ve probably got
the right section. If it doesn’t, then you haven’t.

Quote!
When you’re asked to identify the conclusion of a passage, you should give a direct
quotation. You’re being asked to pick out a specific phrase that the rest of the
passage is trying to get you to accept. If you give a rough paraphrase, then you risk
changing the meaning of the phrase slightly, and so giving an inaccurate statement of
the conclusion. Even missing out a word or two can change the meaning of the
conclusion resulting in inaccuracy in your answer. To err on the side of caution,
always quote word-for-word.
3
2.
Reasons
The reasons in an argument are the claims made in an attempt to persuade you that the
conclusion is true.

The Because Test
A test that can help you to identify the reasons in a passage is the ‘because test’.
Simply insert the word “because” into the passage directly before the phrase that you
think is a reason. If the passage makes sense, then you’ve probably got the right
section. If it doesn’t, then you haven’t.

Quote!
When you’re asked to identify the reasons in a passage, you must give direct
quotations. You’re being asked to pick out a specific claim that the passage makes in
attempting to prove its conclusion. If you give a rough paraphrase, then you risk
changing the claim, resulting in inaccuracy in your answer and so losing you marks.
3.
Intermediate Conclusions
An intermediate conclusion is something in an argument that functions both as a reason and
as a conclusion. To function as a reason, it must offer support to the main conclusion of the
argument (or to another intermediate conclusion). To function as a conclusion, there must be
something else in the argument that lends it support.
Take, for example, the following argument: “Your face is covered in chocolate, so it must
have been you that ate my cake, so you owe me a cake.” The main conclusion of this
argument is the final clause: “You owe me a cake.” This is supported by the previous clause,
which is therefore functioning as a reason, “it must have been you that ate my cake.” This
clause, though, is also supported by the previous clause, “Your face is covered in
chocolate”, so it is both a conclusion and a reason; it is an intermediate conclusion.
4.
Assumptions
An assumption, for the purposes of this course, is an unstated reason. It is something that
must be true for an argument to work, but which is not explicitly stated in the argument.
For example, the argument “The college address is the same street as I’m standing on;
therefore, the college must be nearby” assumes that the street isn’t very long. If the street is
long, then the college could be on it but still miles away.

The Negative Test
To test whether something is assumed by an argument, you can use the negative
test. This involves inserting the opposite of the alleged assumption into the
argument and seeing if it still makes sense.
4
For example, to test whether the above argument assumes that the street isn’t very
long, we would check whether this makes sense: “The college address is the same
street as I’m standing on; the street is very long; therefore, the college must be
nearby.”
With the opposite of the alleged assumption inserted, the argument clearly doesn’t
make sense, so the alleged assumption must be true for the argument to work; it is
assumed by the original argument.

Don’t Quote!
When answering a question that asks you to identify an assumption, unlike when
answering other questions, you should never give a quote from the text; by definition,
assumptions are unstated.
5.
Counter Arguments
A counter-argument is an argument that goes against the author’s main conclusion.
Typically, counter-arguments are considered and rejected in an attempt to strengthen the
author’s case.
For example, “If Superman and Spiderman had a fight, then Superman would win as his
ability to fly would mean he could attack from any angle. You might think that Spiderman’s
ability to hurl webs (a ranged weapon) would give him the edge, but Superman would be
manoeuvrable enough to dodge them.”
In this passage, the main conclusion is “If Superman and Spiderman had a fight, then
Superman would win”. The reason given in support of this is “his ability to fly would mean he
could attack from any angle”. Also considered, though, is an argument that Spiderman would
win: “Spiderman’s ability to hurl webs (a ranged weapon) would give him the edge”; this is a
counter-argument. It is then dismissed with the comment “Superman would be
manoeuvrable enough to dodge them”.
6.
Indicator Words
There are certain words that often indicate the presence of a particular element of an
argument. These are called indicator words. Not every element of an argument is flagged up
by an indicator word, and not every use of an indicator word is associated with an element of
an argument, but indicator words are useful guides.

Conclusions
Conclusions are often indicated by one of the following words or phrases: “therefore”;
“thus”; “hence”; “so”; “in conclusion”; “consequently”; “showing that”; “demonstrating
that”; “proving that”; “establishing that”; “meaning that”; “entails that”; “implies that”;
“as a result”. In past papers, conclusions have often been statements about how we
5
ought to respond to something, so “should”, “must”, and “ought to” should also be
treated as indicator words, albeit cautiously.

Reasons
Indicator words for reasons include the following: “because”; “as”; “since”; “in order
to”; “otherwise”. Sometimes authors enumerate their reasons, writing “First”,
“Second”, “Third,” etc., which can also help in their identification.

Counter-Arguments
Counter-arguments can be given away by phrases like “some might argue that”, “it
has been suggested that”, or equivalent phrases. The main giveaway for counterarguments, though, is that the reason(s) cited count against the author’s conclusion
rather than for it.
7.
Evidence Sampling
When presented with observational evidence to support a claim, we need to be wary. It is
said that there are lies, damned lies, and statistics, and that you can devise a survey to
prove anything that you want. If we are told “A study has shown that…” then we should think
twice before we accept the conclusion that is drawn from it.

Misrepresenting the Data
The most basic mistake in interpreting evidence is simply misrepresenting the data. If
the observational data do not fit the inference drawn, then there is a problem. There
is the possibility of deliberate distortion, accidental misinterpretation, and selectivity.

Insufficient Data
A more common error is drawing a conclusion from insufficient data. Every study
has a margin of error, and the smaller the study the greater this will be. Studies with
a significant margin of error always leave doubt about any conclusions based on
them, so it is important to consider the quantity of data in a study in assessing its
validity.

Unrepresentative Data
A constant danger in empirical studies is unrepresentative data. A study that has a
sufficient quantity of data may nevertheless be flawed due to insufficient quality of
evidence. For a general conclusion to be drawn with any confidence from a limited
data set, it must be reasonable to believe that the data set is representative.
8.
Logical Fallacies
Logical fallacies are common errors of reasoning. If an argument commits a logical fallacy,
then the reasons that it offers don’t prove the argument’s conclusion. (Of course, that doesn’t
necessarily mean that the conclusion is false, just that these particular reasons don’t show
that it’s true.)
6
There are literally dozens of logical fallacies (and dozens of fallacy web-sites out there that
explain them).
You need to be able to recognise these fallacies and to explain what is wrong with
arguments that commit them (just being able to label them is not enough on its own!). Once
you’ve learned what the fallacies are, pay attention and see if you can spot any of them
being committed on TV, the radio, or in the press.

Ad Hominem
“Ad hominem” is Latin for “against the man”. The ad hominem fallacy is the fallacy of
attacking the person offering an argument rather than the argument itself. Ad
hominem can simply take the form of abuse: e.g. “don’t listen to him, he’s a jerk”.
Any attack on irrelevant biographical details of the arguer rather than on his argument
counts as an ad hominem however: e.g. “that article must be rubbish as it wasn’t
published in a peer-reviewed journal”; “his claim must be false as he has no relevant
expertise”; “he says that we should get more exercise but he could stand to lose a
few pounds himself”.

Appeal to Authority
An appeal to an authority is an argument that attempts to establish its conclusion by
citing a perceived authority who claims that the conclusion is true. In all cases,
appeals to authority are fallacious; no matter how well-respected someone is, it is
possible for them to make a mistake. The mere fact that someone says that
something is true therefore doesn’t prove that it is true.
The worst kinds of appeal to authority, however, are those where the alleged authority
isn’t an authority on the subject matter in question. People speaking outside of their
area of expertise certainly aren’t to be trusted on matters of any importance without
further investigation.
Example
“Darwin’s theory of evolution is false; my pastor says so.”
A pastor saying that a complex scientific theory is false doesn’t prove that it’s so,
particularly if the pastor lacks a background in science.

Appeal to History
There are two types of appeal to history. The first is committed by arguments that use
past cases as a guide to the future. This is the predictive appeal to history fallacy.
Just because something has been the case to date, doesn’t mean that it will continue
to be the case.
This is not to say that we can’t use the past as a guide to the future, merely that
predictions of the future based on the past need to be treated with caution.
7
The second type of appeal to history is committed when it is argued that because
something has been done a particular way in the past, it ought to be done that way in
the future. This is the normative appeal to history fallacy, the appeal to tradition. The
way that things have always been done is not necessarily the best way to do them. It
may be that circumstances have changed, and that what used to be best practice is
no longer. Alternatively, it may be that people have been consistently getting it wrong
in the past. In either case, using history as a model for future would be a mistake.
Example
At the start of the 2006 Premiership season, some might have argued, “Under Jose
Mourinho, Chelsea have been unstoppable in the Premiership; the other teams might
as well give up on the league now and concentrate on the Cup competitions.”

Appeal to Popularity
The appeal to popularity fallacy is the fallacy of arguing that because lots of people
believe something it must be true. Popular opinion is not always a good guide to
truth; even ideas that are widely accepted can be false.
Example
“Pretty much everyone believes in some kind of higher power, be it God or something
else. Therefore atheism is false.”

Circularity
Circular arguments are arguments that assume what they’re trying to prove. If the
conclusion of an argument is also one of its reasons, then the argument is circular.
The problem with arguments of this kind is that they don’t get you anywhere. If you
already believe the reasons offered to persuade you that the conclusion is true, then
you already believe that the conclusion is true, so there’s no need to try to convince
you.
If, on the other hand, you don’t already believe that the conclusion is true, then you
won’t believe the reasons given in support of it, so won’t be convinced by the
argument. In either case, you’re left believing exactly what you believed before. The
argument has accomplished nothing.
Example
“You can trust me; I wouldn’t lie to you.”

Confusing Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
Necessary conditions are conditions which must be fulfilled in order for an event to
come about. It is impossible for an event to occur unless the necessary conditions for
it are fulfilled. For example, a necessary condition of you passing your Mathematics
8
examination is that you actually sit the examination. Without doing so, there’s no way
that you can get the qualification.
Sufficient conditions are conditions which, if fulfilled, guarantee that an event will
come to pass. It is impossible for an event not to occur if the sufficient conditions for it
are fulfilled. For example, a sufficient condition of you passing Mathematics is that
you get enough marks on the relevant exams. If you do that, there’s no way that you
can fail. Some arguments confuse necessary and sufficient conditions. Such
arguments fail to prove their conclusions.
Example
“People who don’t practice regularly always fail music exams. I’ve practiced regularly
though, so I’ll be all right.”
Not having practiced regularly may be a sufficient condition for failing a music exam,
but it isn’t necessary. People who have practiced regularly may fail anyway, due to
nerves, perhaps, or simply a lack of talent.

Correlation not Causation
The correlation not causation fallacy is committed when one reasons that just
because two things are found together (i.e. are correlated) there must be a direct
causal connection between them. Often arguments of this kind seem compelling, but
it’s important to consider other possible explanations before concluding that one thing
must have caused the other.
Example
“Since you started seeing that girl your grades have gone down. She’s obviously been
distracting you from your work, so you mustn’t see her anymore.”

Inconsistency
An argument is inconsistent if makes two or more contradictory claims. If an
argument is inconsistent, then we don’t have to accept its conclusion. This is because
if claims are contradictory, then at least one of them must be false. An argument that
rests on contradictory claims must therefore rest on at least one false claim, and
arguments that rest on false claims prove nothing.
In an argument that makes contradictory claims, whichever of those claims turns out
to be false the arguer won’t have proved their conclusion. This means that it is
reasonable to dismiss an inconsistent argument even without finding out which of its
contradictory claims is false.
9
Examples
“Murder is the worst crime that there is. Life is precious; no human being should take
it away. That’s why it’s important that we go to any length necessary to deter wouldbe killers, including arming the police to the teeth and retaining the death penalty.”
This argument both affirms that no human being should take the life of another, and
that we should retain the death penalty. Until this inconsistency is ironed out of the
argument, it won’t be compelling.
“We don’t tell the government what to do, so they shouldn’t tell us what to do!”
These were the words of an angry smoker interviewed on the BBC News following the
introduction of a ban on smoking in enclosed public places in England. Her claim that
she doesn’t tell the government what to do is instantly refuted as she proceeds to do
just that.

Generalisation
Arguments often use specific cases to support general conclusions.
For example, we might do a quick survey of Premiership footballers, note that each of
the examples we’ve considered is vain and ego-centric, and conclude that they all are.
(Or we might offer one example of an argument that moves from the specific to the
general as evidence that others do the same.) We need to be careful with such
arguments.
In order for a set of evidence to support a general conclusion, the evidence must meet
certain conditions. For example, it must be drawn from a sufficient number of cases,
and the specific cases must be representative. The more limited or unrepresentative
the evidence sample, the less convincing the argument will be. Arguments that base
conclusions on insufficient evidence commit the generalisation fallacy.
Examples
“Smoking isn’t bad for you; my granddad smoked thirty a day for his whole life and
lived to be 92.”
“Estate agents are well dodgy. When we moved house… [insert horror story about an
estate agent inventing fake offers to push up the sale price].”

Restricting the Options
We are sometimes faced with a number of possible views or courses of action. By a
process of elimination, we may be able to eliminate these options one-by-one until
only one is left. We are then forced to accept the only remaining option. Arguments
that do this, but fail to consider all of the possible options, excluding some at the
outset, commit the restricting the options fallacy.
10
Example
“Many gifted children from working class backgrounds are let down by the education
system in this country. Parents have a choice between paying sky-high fees to send
their children to private schools, and the more affordable option of sending their
children to inferior state schools. Parents who can’t afford to pay private school fees
are left with state schools as the only option. This means that children with great
potential are left languishing in comprehensives“.
Quite apart from any problems with the blanket dismissal of all comprehensives as
inferior, this argument fails to take into account all of the options available to parents.
For the brightest students, scholarships are available to make private school more
affordable, so there is a third option not considered above: applying for scholarships
to private schools. Unless this option can be eliminated, e.g. by arguing that there are
too few scholarships for all gifted children to benefit from them, along with other
options such as homeschooling, the conclusion that children with great potential have
no alternative but to go to comprehensives is unproven.

Slippery Slope
Sometimes one event can set of a chain of consequences; one thing leads to
another, as the saying goes. The slippery slope fallacy is committed by arguments
that reason that because the last link in the chain is undesirable, the first link is
equally undesirable. This type of argument is not always fallacious. If the first event
will necessarily lead to the undesirable chain of consequences, then there is nothing
wrong with inferring that we ought to steer clear of it. However, if it is possible to have
the first event without the rest, then the slippery slope fallacy is committed.
Example
“If one uses sound judgement, then it can occasionally be safe to exceed the speed
limit. However, we must clamp down on speeding, because when people break the
law it becomes a habit, and escalates out of control. The more one breaks the law,
the less respect one has for it. If one day you break the speed limit, then the next
you’ll go a little faster again, and pretty soon you’ll be driving recklessly, endangering
the lives of other road-users. For this reason, we should take a zero-tolerance
approach to speeding, and stop people before they reach dangerous levels.”

Straw Man
Straw Man arguments are arguments that misrepresent a position in order to refute it.
Unfortunately, adopting this strategy means that only the misrepresentation of the
position is refuted; the real position is left untouched by the argument.
11
Examples
“Christianity teaches that as long as you say ‘Sorry’ afterwards, it doesn’t matter what
you do. Even the worst moral crimes can be quickly and easily erased by simply
uttering a word. This is absurd. Even if a sinner does apologise for what they’ve done,
the effects of their sin are often here to stay. For example, if someone repents of
infanticide, that doesn’t bring the infant back to life. Christians are clearly out of touch
with reality.”
This argument distorts Christianity in a couple of ways. First, it caricatures
repentance as simply saying the word ‘Sorry’. Second, it implies that Christianity
teaches that all of the negative effects of sin are erased when one confesses, which it
doesn’t. Having distorted Christianity, the argument then correctly points out that the
distortion is ludicrous, and quite reasonably rejects it as “out of touch with reality”.
The argument, however, completely fails to engage with what the Church actually
teachers, and so its conclusion has nothing to do with real Christianity.

Tu Quoque (“Tu quoque” is Latin for “you too”)
The tu quoque fallacy involves using other people’s faults as an excuse for one’s
own, reasoning that because someone or everyone else does something, it’s okay for
us to do it. This, of course, doesn’t follow. Sometimes other people have shortcomings, and we ought to do better than them. We can be blamed for emulating
other people’s faults.
Example
“It doesn’t matter that I occasionally break the speed limit; everyone else does it.”

Weak Analogy
Arguments by analogy rest on a comparison between two cases. They examine a
known case, and extend their findings there to an unknown case. Thus we might
reason that because we find it difficult to forgive a girlfriend or boyfriend who cheated
on us (a known case), it must be extremely difficult for someone to forgive a spouse
who has had an affair (an unknown case).
This kind of argument relies on the cases compared being similar. The argument is
only as strong as that comparison. If the two cases are dissimilar in important
respects, then the argument commits the weak analogy fallacy.
12
Appendix: Research Task
Topic: Interactive Communities
This topic covers all the themes – ethical, political, economic, technological and
environmental. Using the two resources provided as a starting-point, your research should
enable you to consider (elucidate and evaluate) the arguments for and against the existence
and use of interactive communities on the following grounds:
 Ethical – does the existence of interactive communities facilitate immoral activities
(for example, pornography and copyright theft), or is it a violation of natural rights to
interfere in their activities?
 Political – are interactive communities a breeding-ground for terrorism or an essential
element in modern democracy?
 Economic – what role do interactive communities have to play in the twenty-first
century global economy? Are they agents of globalization, destroying local industry,
or an invaluable aid in sharing technological innovation?
 Technological – can the internet cope with the increasing demands being placed
upon it?
 Environmental – is at least partially removing the need for paper in communication
offset by the environmental cost of running the servers needed to support our internet
use?
Begin by looking in detail at the following resources:
Internet sites could be given 'cinema-style age ratings', Culture Secretary says
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/technologynews/3965051/Inter
net-sites-could-be-given-cinema-style-age-ratings-Culture-Secretary-says.html
Frank Fisher: Freedom of speech on the internet should be protected
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/29/censorship-andyburnham
1,
Evaluate the strengths of the arguments in the two resources. Answer the following
question: Do the arguments of the second resource successfully refute the arguments
presented in the first?
2.
Working in pairs, do a presentation on an issue arising from the links between any two
themes in this topic. You will need to do more research for this.
3.
Write an essay on one of the questions posed in the summary above.
The source work exercise is due in two weeks’ time, the presentation a week later and the
essay a week after that. This should give you the time to research and prepare effectively.
13
Interactive Communities Resources
From The Economist, a few starters:
http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12411882
(on interactive communities and the economy)
http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/displaystory.cfm?subjectid=348963&s
tory_id=12673221
(on the technological limitations of the internet)
http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/displaystory.cfm?subjectid=348963&s
tory_id=12673385
(on ‘cyberwarfare’, a political dimension to the topic)
http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/displaystory.cfm?subjectid=348963&s
tory_id=12641740
(on the effect of the internet on environmental campaigning)
http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/displaystory.cfm?subjectid=348963&s
tory_id=12376821
(on hopes for the paperless office)
http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/displaystory.cfm?subjectid=348963&s
tory_id=12295455
(on government surveillance of our internet use)
The BBC also has lots of interesting news stories to delve into – a few tasters here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7797280.stm
(Was 2008 the year of the net underground economy taking off?)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7800846.stm
(Should websites get age ratings like films?)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7799524.stm
(the impact of online shopping on the economy)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7359589.stm
(child pornography online)
The Observer’s Henry Porter can be relied upon to raise issues about the threats to our civil
liberties from government use of IT technology – see here for a recent example:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/25/civilliberties
14