Chapter 2, Exercise Sets
More standardization and diagramming
Chapter 2, Exercise 1
2. This passage does not contain an argument. It begins with a comment that everyone knows the
U.S. is having an election (in 2008); the author proceeds to state three things that he thinks
Europe should focus on. He does not offer reasons for his statement that these three things are
jobs, Muslims, and neighbors.
4. This passage does contain an argument. The conclusion is in the last sentence and is indicated
by the word “therefore.” The other three sentences are premises
6. This passage does not contain an argument. It amounts to an expression of thanks publicly
stated by the Spirit of Sport Foundation.
7. The passage contains both an argument and a subargument.
(1) The butler was passionately in love with the victim.
Thus,
(2) It was not the butler who committed the murder.
(3) Either the butler committed the murder or the judge committed the murder.
Therefore,
(4)The judge committed the murder.
The subargument goes from (1) to (2), and the main argument goes from (2) and (3) to (4).
(1)
(2) + (3)
(4)
12. This passage contains a linear argument from (1) to (2).
We are not under an obligation to give aid unless it is likely to be effective in reducing starvation
or malnutrition.
Therefore,
(2) We are not under an obligation to give aid to countries that make no effort to reduce the rate
of population growth that will lead to catastrophe.
16. This passage contains an argument. Standardization:
(1) No one who uses a relatively unreliable procedure in order to decide whether to punish can
know whether that other person deserves punishment.
(2) No one who cannot know whether another person deserves punishment has a right to punish
that person.
Therefore,
(3) No one who uses a relatively unreliable procedure in order to decide whether to punish
another person has a right to punish that person.
(1) +
(2)
(3)
17. This passage does not contain an argument; it offers observations on the role of observations
in obtaining a good diagnosis.
Chapter 2, Exercise set 2, 3, and 4
More standardization and diagramming
Exercise set 2
(1) There is no point in getting your first elementary education in some other language if your
native language is English, because English is the language of world business and world
scholarship, and English is the most important language a person can learn to speak and write
fluently.
(1)
(2)
(3)
5. There must be electrons because scientific theories and calculations based on the hypothesis
that they exist explain many things that happen in our world.
(1) Scientific theories and calculations based on the hypothesis that electrons exist explain
many things that happen in our world.
Therefore
(2) Electrons must exist.
Since there is one premise and one conclusion, the support pattern is, by default, linear.
6. Language is necessary for communication, and communication is necessary for the
advancement of our civilization. Therefore, language is necessary for the advancement of our
civilization. And we can go on from this point. Because language is necessary for human
advancement, any attempt to censor language will restrict that advancement. Therefore the
censorship of written materials is always wrong.
(1) Language is necessary for communication.
(2) Communication is necessary for the advancement of our civilization.
Therefore
(3) Language is necessary for the advancement of our civilization.
(4) Any attempt to censor language will restrict the advancement of our civilization.
Therefore,
(5) The censorship of written materials is always wrong.
This argument is linear, if we take (3) to give us grounds for (4).
8. How could there be life without change? Stagnation is death.
(1) Stagnation is death.
Therefore,
(2) There can be no life without change.
9. Descartes influenced Pascal and Pascal influenced Sartre. Therefore, Descartes influenced
Sartre. This seems to be clearly linked, since (3) makes mention of concepts only connected by
(1) and (2) together.
EXERCISE 3
Assume that each of the following passages states an argument in which the final sentence
contains the conclusion. (Note: The final sentence may also contain a supporting premise, but at
the very least, it will contain the conclusion.) In each case, determine the premises of the
argument. Are there any unstated premises? If so, what are they?
1. If the global climate is getting warmer, then winters on the Canadian prairie should be less
severe. And they're pretty mild. What can we conclude from that?
The invited conclusion is that (3) the global climate is getting warmer. The premises are (1) if the
global climate is getting warmer winters on the Canadian prairie should be less severe and (2)
winters on the Canadian prairie are (by implication) less severe.
(1)
+
(2)
(3)
4. Mad cow disease spreads because of a certain form of protein that is not destroyed by
disinfecting efforts, even at very high temperatures. Because we can't control the way it spreads,
the disease is very serious.
The main conclusion is that mad cow disease is very serious. A premise is (1) mad cow disease
spreads because of a certain form of protein that is not destroyed by disinfecting efforts, and this
premise establishes a subconclusion, (2) that we cannot control the way mad cow disease
spreads. The argument is (1) therefore (2) therefore (3), in a linear support pattern.
7. Young people are often bored. They do crazy, sometimes criminal, things out of boredom. So
the way to cut the crime rate among youth is to give them some meaningful activities to do.
The conclusion is (3) the way to cut the crime rate among youth is to give them some meaningful
activities to do. The premises are (1) Young people do crazy, sometimes criminal, things out of
boredom.
The missing premise is (2) if young people are given meaningful activities to do, they will not be
bored.
(1) + (3)
(2)
9. Photographs can be altered and the techniques for doing so are increasingly sophisticated, due
to the use of computers. You can see a man and his children in a picture, with no wife beside
him, and yet in the original picture his wife (whom he has now divorced) was there. He had her
eliminated with sophisticated alteration techniques. You can see from this that photographs are
not a reliable guide to what reality was like in the past.
The conclusion is that (3) photographs are not a reliable guide to what reality was like in the
past. The second and third sentences are best understood as illustrative material. But The
illustrative material could be understood as providing a sub-argument for (1) here. The
premises are (1) Photographs can be (easily) altered and (2) The techniques for altering
photographs are increasingly sophisticated due to the use of computers.
(2)
(1)
(3)
EXERCISE 4
In each of the following passages, state whether an argument is given. If so, identify the
conclusion. Do you think any of these passages should be interpreted as expressing an argument
with an unstated conclusion? If so, which ones? What is the unstated conclusion, and what are
your reasons for reading it into the passage?
Show her you care by giving jewelry. These glorious jewels have delighted beautiful women for
more than a century. What could be better for the woman you love?
There is an unstated conclusion to the effect that you should give the woman you love glorious
jewels. The premise is that glorious jewels like these have delighted beautiful women for more
than a century. (Clearly, this passage copies the style of an advertisement.)
6. Background: The following passage is taken from Alfie Kohn, No Contest: The Case Against
Competition (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1992), p. 51. (Punctuation has been altered slightly.)
Since group performance in problem solving is superior to even the individual work of the most
expert group members, it should not be surprising that students learn better when they cooperate.
There is an argument. The premise is that group performance in problem solving is superior to
even the individual work of the most expert group members. The conclusion is that students
learn better when they cooperate. There is no unstated conclusion.
9. Background: The following passage is the text of an advertisement that appeared in The
Atlantic Monthly in May 1999, posted by the Nuclear Energy Institute, based in Washington,
D.C. The text is accompanied by two photographs. The first shows a plant, or factory, with blue
sky and clouds above it and the words Fresh Air written against the sky. The second shows ripe
red tomatoes glossy with drops of moisture and has "Fresh Food" written in it.
Nuclear makes it happen. Chances are you know nuclear power generates about 20 percent of
America's electricity without emitting greenhouse gases, but nuclear technology contributes to
our lives in countless other ways. Through food irradiation, for example, harmful microbes such
as E. coli can be virtually eliminated in meats, fruits, and vegetables. That means more peace of
mind at the dinner table. From medical miracles to space exploration, nuclear technology
enhances our lives in many ways. It's the same technology that enables more than 100 nuclear
power plants to produce valuable electricity and keep our air clean. That's one reason why the
majority of Americans believe nuclear power-one of our cleanest sources of electricity-should
continue to play an important role in our energy future. NUCLEAR. SO MUCH MORE THAN
YOU EVER IMAGINED.
The visual materials are described because they help to understand what the advertisers are
trying to establish here. The conclusion is that (5) nuclear processes are safe and should continue
to play an important role in the future of American energy. The stated premises are (1) that
nuclear power does not emit greenhouse cases; (2) that irradiation of foods eliminates harmful
microbes; (3) that nuclear technology helps in various activities ranging from medicine to space
exploration. The claim that nuclear power plants help keep the air clean can be plausibly viewed
as a repetition of (1). All these points are stated, not implicit. The visual material is intended to
convey an association between nuclear power and natural health.
(1) Nuclear power does not emit greenhouse cases.
(2) that irradiation of foods eliminates harmful microbes.
(3) that nuclear technology helps in various activities ranging from medicine to space
exploration.
Therefore,
(4) Nuclear processes are safe and should continue to play an important role in the future of
American energy.
(1) (2)
(3)
(5)
10. Not all discrimination is wrong. For example, if a golf competition wants to restrict
admission to players with less than a certain handicap level, it's quite all right to do that.
The conclusion is the first sentence. The premise is the second sentence. The missing premise is
(3) restricting admission to a golf competition is an example of discrimination.
(1) + (3)
(2)
11. Women's ski jumping was not accepted as an event in 2008 Olympics. But what's gone wrong
here? This sport has been recognized for a long time. There are competitions in many different
countries. And there are some pretty expert women jumpers who are thrilling to watch.
The conclusion is (4) women’s ski jumping should be accepted as an event in the Olympics.
This conclusion is not quite stated explicitly; it can be drawn from the rhetorical question in the
second sentence, and from the first sentence. There are three premises and these are offered in a
convergent support pattern. (1) Women’s ski jumping has been recognized for a long time. (2)
There are competitions in women’s ski jumping in many different countries. (3) There are some
pretty expert women ski jumpers who are thrilling to watch. (4) Women’s ski jumping should be
accepted as an event in the Olympics.
(1) (2) (3)
(4)
EXERCISE SET
EXERCISE 5
For each of the following examples, (a) decide whether the passage contains an argument. If it
does, then (b) represent the argument in a standardized form with the premises preceding the
conclusion. (c) Check carefully to see whether any passage requires either a missing conclusion
or a missing premise. (d) Indicate any subarguments. (e) If you add material that is not explicitly
stated by the author, give interpretive reasons for doing so. Remember, there should be no
supplementation without justification.
2. High blood pressure is a real health hazard. Therefore, anyone who is overweight should get to
work and reduce.
Standardization:
(1) High blood pressure is a real health hazard.
(3) Being overweight is likely to cause high blood pressure (missing premise)
Therefore,
(2) Anyone who is overweight should get to work and reduce.
(1) + (3)
(2)
(3) Any busy person is at risk of illnesses caused by stress. So all mothers run those risks.
Standardization:
(1) Any busy person is at risk of illnesses caused by stress.
(3) All mothers are busy persons, (missing premise)
So,
(2) All mothers are at risk of illnesses caused by stress.
(1) + (3)
(2)
(5) If people were truly unselfish, they would give as much to worthy charities as they save for
their old age. But do they? You tell me!
Standardization:
(1) If people were truly unselfish, they would give as much to worthy charities as they save for
old age.
(3) People do not give as much to worthy charities as they save for their old age. (missing
premise, indicated by the rhetorical question, "do they?")
Therefore,
(2) People are not truly unselfish, (missing conclusion, indicated by the rhetorical question at the
end of the passage)
(1) + (3)
(2)
8. We all hope to grow old someday, and when we grow old, we will need the services of
retailers, manufacturers, politicians, dentists, doctors, nurses, and many other personnel. These
people will provide us with what we need, and they will help to care for us. Who will they be?
Only a few, if any, will be our own children. The rest will be other people's children. Thus, we all
have a personal stake in educating other people's children. Anyone who says, "I am willing to
pay to educate my own children, but not other people's children" is making a serious mistake.
Standardization:
(1) We all hope to grow old some day
(2) When we grow old we will need the services of retailers, manufacturers, politicians, dentists,
doctors, nurses, and many other personnel
(3) Retailers, manufacturers, politicians, dentists, doctors, nurses, and many other personnel will
provide us with what we need
(4) Retailers, manufacturers, politicians, dentists, doctors, nurses, and many other personnel will
help to care for us
(5) Only a few of retailers, manufacturers, etc. will be our own children
So,
(6)The rest of these people will be other people's children
Therefore, (7) We all have a personal stake in educating other people's children.
(3) And (4) are problematic here. Perhaps it’s best to see them as supporting (2), the idea being
that when we get old we will need these peoples’ services to take care of us and give us what we
need.
(3) + (4)
(1) + (2)
(5)
+
(6)
(7)
11. Background: This passage comes from a book by Ahmed Rashid about the Taliban party in
Afghanistan.
There were no political conditions in which the Taliban were prepared to compromise. After
every military defeat they tightened their gender policies ferociously, under the assumption that
harsher measures against women would sustain morale amongst their defeated soldiers. And
every victory led to another tightening because the newly conquered population had to be shown
Taliban power. (Ahmed Rashid, Taliban: Militant Islam) Oil) and Fundamentalism in Central
Asia [New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001], p. 112.)
This doesn’t seem to be (best interpreted as) an argument.
13. "If Kelsey is highly intelligent, she would only go out with highly intelligent guys and I'm
not one of them. So why would Kelsey go out with me?"
The conclusion is implied by the rhetorical question at the end. It is (3) Kelsey would not likely
go out with the speaker. The stated premises are (1) if Kelsey is highly intelligent she would
only go out with highly intelligent guys and (2) the speaker is not a highly intelligent guy. An
unstated premise, which we will call (4), is that Kelsey is highly intelligent.
(1) If Kelsey is highly intelligent she would only go out with highly intelligent guys
(2) The speaker is not a highly intelligent guy.
(4) Kelsey is highly intelligent.
(3) Kelsey will not likely go out with the speaker.
(1) + (2) + (4)
(3)
15. "I found out Kelsey is a librarian, which means she's highly intelligent.“
(1) Kelsey is a librarian.
(2) Librarians are highly intelligent.
(3) Kelsey is highly intelligent.
(1) + (2)
(3)
16. "Since watching the news and reading the news are both elements in the same syndrome, it is
hardly surprising that TV news viewing is positively associated with civic involvement. Those of
us who rely solely on TV news are not quite as civic in our behavior as our fellow citizens who
rely on newspapers, we news watchers are nevertheless more civic than other Americans.
Regular viewers of network newscasts ... spend more time on community projects, attend more
club meetings, and follow politics much more closely than other Americans." (Robert Putnam,
Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community [New York: Touchstone,
2001], p. 220.)
This is an argument if one invokes a great deal of charity. By and large, however, it is
description.