1
Reasoning Handbook
Dona Warren
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Recognizing, Analyzing, Evaluating, and
Constructing Arguments
Argument Recognition ………………………… 3
Argument Analysis ……………………………. 4
Identify Important Ideas …………………… 5
Identify Argumentative Role ……………… 8
Identify Inferences ………………………… 9
Reconstruct the Argument ………………… 11
Argument Evaluation …………………………. 11
Appreciate Structure of Argument ………... 12
Evaluate Premises …………………………. 13
Evaluate Inferences ………………………… 14
Evaluate Argument ………………………… 16
Argument Construction …………………………16
Determine Ultimate Conclusion …………….16
Construct Chain of Reasoning ………………17
Communicate the Argument ………………...18
Spoken Arguments, Reading Advice and Writing
Tips
Spoken Arguments …………………………….. 20
Reading Advice ………………………………… 21
First Reading ……………………………….. 22
Second Reading ……………………………. 22
Third Reading ……………………………… 23
Fourth Reading …………………………….. 24
Writing Tips ……………………………………. 24
Characteristics of a Good Paper …………… 24
Process of Writing ………………………….. 26
3
RECOGNIZING, ANALYZING, EVALUATING,
AND CONSTRUCTING ARGUMENTS
I. Argument Recognition
An argument is a unit of reasoning which attempts
to prove that a certain idea is true by citing other
ideas as evidence. The idea that the argument tries
to prove is called the “ultimate conclusion.” Ideas
which the argument uses as evidence for the
ultimate conclusion, but which the argument
assumes to be true without providing proof, are
called “premises.” Intermediate ideas on the way
from the premises to the ultimate conclusion are
called “subconclusions.” The connection that holds
between a set of ideas, S, and another idea, I, when
the truth of the ideas in S is supposed to establish
the truth of I is called an “inference.”
In order to identify an argument, we ask “Is this
passage trying to convince us that something is
true?” If so, the passage contains an argument. If
not, it doesn’t.
Tips:
Use Inference Indicator Expressions
Since all arguments have inferences and
since inferences are sometimes expressed by
inference indicator expressions, we can sometimes
recognize an argument by spotting inference
indicator expressions.
4
Reason indicator expressions show that X is
being given as evidence for Y. Some examples: “Y
because X” or “Because X, Y.” “Y, since X” or
“Since X, Y.” “Given that X, Y” or “Y, given that
X.” “Assuming that X, Y” or “Y, assuming that X.”
“Inasmuch as X, Y” or “Y, inasmuch as X.” “In
view of the fact that X, Y” or “Y, in view of the fact
that X.” “Y. The reason is that X” “Y. After all,
X.”
Conclusion indicator expressions, show that
Y is supported by X. Some examples: “X. Therefore
Y.” “X. Thus Y.” “X. Consequently Y.” “X. Hence
Y.” “X. So Y.” “X. This goes to show that Y.” “X.
It follows that Y.” “X. As a result, Y.” “X. That’s
why Y.” “X, which implies that Y.” “X, which
means that Y.”
We should remember that some passages
that contain inference indicator expressions don’t
contain arguments because inference indicator
expressions can appear both in arguments and in
explanations of why. If the passage is trying to
convince us that something is true, it’s an argument.
If a passage is trying to help us understand why
something is true, what caused it, or how it came
about, it’s an explanation of why.
We should also remember that some
passages that contain arguments don’t contain
inference indicator expressions.
II. Argument Analysis
We should always take time to understand an
argument before we evaluate it.
5
Analyzing an argument is largely a matter of skill
and the analysis of an argument is often an
objective matter.
Identifying the ultimate conclusion, identifying the
lines of reasoning, identifying the other important
ideas, identifying the argumentative role of these
ideas, identifying the inferences, and reconstructing
the argument are often intermingled in practice and
are frequently done mentally.
1. Identify the important ideas
We make a list of the important ideas in the
argument. Ideas are complete thoughts that are
either true or false, even though we might not know
for certain which it is.
Tips:
Start With the Ultimate Conclusion
We start by asking “What is the main idea
that this argument is trying to get us to believe?”
This main idea is the ultimate conclusion and we
write it first in our list of important ideas, giving it
the number “1” and putting a “U” next to it. If the
ultimate conclusion of the argument is unstated, we
list it as letter “a.” If we can’t identify the ultimate
conclusion, we should simply list the important
ideas in the order they appear in the passage. Once
we draw in the inferences, the ultimate conclusion
6
will be the idea to which all of the other ideas
eventually lead.
Identify the Lines of Reasoning
It’s often useful to determine whether or not
the argument appears to have more than one line of
reasoning as soon as possible. If an argument does
have more than one line of reasoning, it’s helpful to
count how many separate lines of reasoning the
argument has and to determine which ideas belong
to each line. This will substantially reduce the
complexity of the diagramming process.
Identify the Other Ideas
After we’ve identified the ultimate
conclusion, we go back and record all of the other
ideas that strike us as relevant to establishing the
truth of the ultimate conclusion, and number them
starting with “2.” If we aren’t sure whether or not
an idea is important, we should include it just to be
safe. It’s okay if some of the ideas in our list aren’t
included in the eventual diagram.
Sentences and Ideas
Sentences which convey ideas are usually
statements. To be complete, a statement must have a
subject and a predicate, and all sentence connectors
must be connecting sentences which are themselves
complete.
Masking statements, unlike normal
statements, convey ideas they don’t actually state.
If the idea is important, we should rephrase the
statement and include it in our list of ideas.
7
Unimportant statements aren’t relevant to
establishing the truth of the ultimate conclusion. We
won’t include them in our list of ideas. Normal
questions don’t convey ideas. Statement questions
do convey ideas. If the idea is important, we should
rephrase the question and include it in our list of
ideas. Normal commands don’t convey ideas.
Statement commands do convey ideas. If the idea is
important, we should rephrase the command and
include it in our list of ideas.
Sometimes a sentence contains more than
one idea. In general, sentence S conveys idea I if the
truth of S ensures the truth of I. We must divide a
sentence into its component ideas around inference
indicator expressions. We may divide a compound
sentence around connectives like “and,” “but,”
“yet,” “however,” “although,” “even though,”
“moreover,” and “nevertheless.” We should split a
sentence into its component ideas if the component
ideas significantly differ in their plausibility or if
one of the component ideas appears without the
others elsewhere in the argument. We can’t divide a
compound sentence around connectives like
“if…then…,” or “or.”
Sometimes multiple sentences in an
argument convey the same idea. S1 and S2 convey
the same idea just in case if S1 is true then S2 is
true and if S2 is true then S1 is true. We write down
each important idea only once, even when it’s
conveyed by more than one sentence.
Use Inference Indicator Expressions
8
Inference indicator expressions can help us
decide if an idea is important. If an idea is the object
of an inference indicator expression, then it’s either
the reason or the conclusion of an inference and so
needs to be included in the argument.
2. Identify the argumentative role of these ideas
If we know what the ultimate conclusion of the
argument is, we put a “U” next to it. For each of
the other ideas in our list, we ask “Does the
argument give us reason to believe this, or does the
argument just take it for granted?” If the argument
doesn’t give us reasons to believe an idea, it’s a
premise. We put “P”s next to the premises. If the
argument does give us reasons to believe an idea,
it’s a subconclusion. We put “S”s next to the
subconclusions. If we don’t know what the ultimate
conclusion is, we can simply put “C”s (indicating
generic conclusions) next to ideas which the
argument gives us reason to believe.
Tips:
Use Inference Indicator Expressions
If an idea is the object of a reason inference
expression, it might be a premise or a subconclusion
but can’t be the ultimate conclusion. If an idea is the
object of a conclusion indicator expressions, it
might be subconclusion or the ultimate conclusion
but can’t be a premise.
Note Inference Erasers
9
The connectors “and” (not “and so”), “but,”
“yet,” “however,” “although,” “even though,”
“moreover,” and “nevertheless,” tend to show us
that an inference is not present between the ideas
they connect.
3. Identify the inferences
We can focus on the conclusions (whether the
ultimate conclusion or a subconclusion) and ask
“What reason does the argument give us to believe
this?” or we can focus on the reasons (whether a
premise or a subconclusion) and ask “What is the
argument taking this to establish?”
We draw an arrow pointing from an idea to the idea
that it’s taken to support.
I1 and I2 are dependent reasons in support of I3 if
neither I1 nor I2 can support I3 alone but together
they can support I3. We connect dependent reasons
with a bracket and draw one arrow from the bracket
to the conclusion of the inference.
I1 and I2 are independent reasons in support of I3 if
both I1 and I2 could support I3 alone. We draw
separate arrows from independent reasons or lines
of reasoning.
Tips:
Use Inference Indicator Expressions
10
We should make use of inference indicator
expressions, if the passage has them.
Note Inference Erasers
We should be alert for inference eraser
expressions.
Arrow In and Out Rules
The ultimate conclusion must have at least
one arrow pointing to it but no arrows pointing from
it. Premises must have arrows going from them but
no arrows going to them. Subconclusions must have
arrows going to them and from them. (Premises can
be re-used, but seldom are.)
Identify Dependent Reasons
There are six tests for dependent reasons: 1)
The Ophthalmology Test, 2) The Try It Out Test, 3)
The Puzzle Piece Test, 4) The Normative
Conclusion Test, 5) The Comparative Conclusion
Test, 6) The Means / Ends Test.
Identify Independent Reasons
To identify independent lines of reasoning,
we ask “How many separate lines of reasoning are
we given?” We can answer this question by
identifying distinct “themes” that are advanced in
support of the conclusion. These themes are roughly
identical with the notions shared be different ideas.
Instances of a generalization may be treated
either as examples or as evidence. If they’re treated
as examples, they shouldn’t be included in the
11
diagram. If they’re treated as evidence, they should
be included in the diagram.
Double-Checking the Inferences
We double check the inferences by reading
down the arrow with a conclusion indicator
expression, by reading up the arrow with a reason
indicator expression, by reading the bracket as an
“and,” and by comparing our inferences against the
original argument.
4. Reconstruct the argument
We refer to the ideas by number, put the number of
the ultimate conclusion at the bottom, the numbers
of the premises at the top, numbers of
subconclusions in the middle, and use arrows to
represent the inferences. We connect dependent
reasons with a plus sign and we draw separate
arrows from independent reasons. We label the
arrows with capital letters to make them easier to
refer to later
III. Argument Evaluation
There is an element of art to evaluating an argument
and reasonable people can disagree about the
correct evaluation of some arguments.
If we’re evaluating an argument mentally, we first
figure out what the ultimate conclusion is and try to
determine how many lines of reasoning there are.
Then we focus on each line of reasoning, one at a
12
time, and identify the important ideas contained in
it. If we think that an idea is a premise, we ask
ourselves whether or not it’s true and acceptable to
the argument’s audience. If we think that an idea a
subconclusion, we ask ourselves whether or not it’s
well supported (e.g. whether or not the reasons and
inferences supporting it are strong). If we think that
an idea is the ultimate conclusion, we ask ourselves
whether or not it’s well supported (e.g. whether or
not the reasons and inferences supporting it are
strong).
1. Appreciate the general structure of the argument
A good argument establishes the truth of its ultimate
conclusion and gives its audience good reason to
think that the ultimate conclusion is true. A bad
argument either doesn’t establish the truth of its
ultimate conclusion or else doesn’t give its audience
good reason to think that the ultimate conclusion is
true.
For arguments with only one line of reasoning, one
bad premise or one bad inference is enough to make
the argument bad. Arguments with independent
lines of reasoning are good if even one of the lines
of reasoning is good.
Tips:
The Hanging Man Model
We can imagine that the ultimate conclusion
of the argument is a fellow hanging onto one or
13
more ropes (inferences) suspended from one or
more beams (premises). The beams may have parts
which could differ in strength, corresponding to
dependent reasons. Each inference corresponds to a
different segment of the rope, and these segments
can differ in the strength. An argument is good if it
holds the fellow up and bad if it lets the fellow fall.
Evaluating Subconclusions
We should never evaluate subconclusions as
a part of the final evaluation of an argument. We
may look at subconclusions in the process of
evaluating an argument. If we disagree with a
subconclusion, we should examine the premises and
inferences above it.
2. Evaluate the premises
Good premises are true and recognizable by the
argument’s audience as true. Thus, when evaluating
a premise, we should always ask ourselves two
questions: 1) “Do I believe that this premise is
true?” and 2) “Could the argument’s audience,
including people who don’t already believe the
ultimate conclusion, recognize this premise as
true?” If the answer to both questions is “yes,” then
the premise is good. If the answer to either question
is “no,” then the premise is bad.
Tips:
Evaluating “If…then…” Sentences
14
In order to evaluate an “if… then…”
sentence, ask yourself “Could the first part be true
and the back part be false at the same time?” If the
answer is “Yes,” then the “If…then…” sentence is
false. If the answer is “No,” then the “If…then…”
sentence is true.
3. Evaluate the inferences
To say that the inference between S and I is valid is
to say that if S were true then I would have to be
true as well. To say that the inference between S
and I is good is to say that if S were true then I
would most likely be true as well, although it
wouldn’t have to be true. To say that the inference
between S and I is bad is to say that even if S were
true, I could very easily be false; it’s to say that the
truth of S has virtually no bearing upon the truth of
I.
Tips:
The Bob Method
Bob is a perfectly gullible but perfectly
rational person. We tell Bob to believe S and then
ask ourselves “In light of his belief in S, how likely
is Bob to believe I?” If Bob is compelled to believe
I, then the inference between S and I is valid. If Bob
is inclined but not compelled to believe I, then the
inference between S and I is invalid but good. If
Bob is not at all inclined to believe I, then the
inference between S and I is invalid and bad.
15
The Counterexample Method
When evaluating argument A1, see if you
can find a structurally similar argument, A2, that
has true premises and a false conclusion. If you can
find such an argument A2, then there’s something
wrong with at least one inference in A1.
The Formal Method
Determine if an inference has one of the
following forms and evaluate it accordingly. “If P
then Q. P. Therefore Q” is valid. “If P then Q. Not
Q. Therefore Not P” is valid. “If P then Q. Q.
Therefore P” is invalid. “If P then Q. Not P.
Therefore Not Q” is invalid. “If P then Q. If Q then
R. Therefore if P then R” is valid. “Either P or Q. If
P then R. If Q then R. Therefore R” is valid. “Either
P or Q. If P then R. If Q then S. Therefore either R
or S” is valid.
Find Missing Subconclusions
If an inference forces us to add together
more than two dependent reasons at a time, and if
the inference isn’t a simple dilemma (Either P or Q.
If P then R. If Q then R. Therefore R.) or a complex
dilemma (Either P or Q. If P then R. If Q then S.
Therefore either R or S.), we can add missing
subconclusion to reduce that inference into multiple
smaller inferences that are easier to evaluate.
To find missing subconclusions, we ask
“What two ideas go together nicely?” and “What
subconclusion follows from these two ideas when
we snap them together?” This idea is the missing
subconclusion. We add the missing subconclusion
16
to our list of ideas and diagram, designating it with
a lowercase letter instead of a number, and allowing
it to play the same role that its two parent ideas
jointly played before. We can proceed in this
fashion until the inference adds together only two
ideas at a time.
4. Evaluate the argument
We evaluate the argument in light of our evaluation
of the premises and the inferences.
Finding out that an argument is bad gives us no
useful information about the ultimate conclusion
because bad arguments can have true or false
conclusions. Finding out that an argument is good
does give us useful information about the ultimate
conclusion because good arguments must have true
conclusions. If we think that an argument is pretty
good but not perfect, we should think that the
conclusion is probably, but not definitely, true. If
we’re faced with arguments for competing
positions, we should believe the position supported
by the strongest arguments.
IV. Argument Construction
1. Determine the ultimate conclusion
We determine our ultimate conclusion by posing a
question, considering various answers to the
question, learning and thinking more about the
issues involved, and formulating our answer to the
17
question. The answer we settle on will be the
ultimate conclusion of our argument.
2. Construct the chain of reasoning
We construct our chain of reasoning by asking
“What are some reasons to think this idea is true?”
Once we have some ideas down, we construct our
argument by determining what argumentative role
we intend each of each of these ideas to serve,
deciding how we want our inferences to run, and
then diagramming our argument.
We evaluate this chain of reasoning by first
assessing the inferences. If an inference is weak,
can we repair it by adding a dependent reason to
plug the gap. We can use the tests for dependent
reasons to find the dependent reason needed to
strengthen an inference, however, we should add
the dependent reasons necessary to perfect an
inference in our argument only if the original
inference was sufficiently weak to justify the
additional complexity involved in supplying extra
ideas.
After we’ve repaired our inferences, we assess our
premises. If a premise isn’t true, we change it to
something that is. If a premise is true but might not
be acceptable to the argument’s audience, we make
the premise a subconclusion by asking “What are
some reasons to think that this idea is true?” and
returning to the beginning. We then evaluate the
18
new inferences, and new premises, repeating the
process until our argument is good.
In order to supply independent lines of reasoning
for an argument of our own, we recognize the theme
of the argument we’ve already constructed and try
to construct and argument of a completely different
type to support the conclusion at hand.
If our argument doesn’t work, we can try to find
another argument to support our ultimate
conclusion. If we can’t find a good argument for
our conclusion, our answer might be wrong and we
should consider other answers to our question. If we
can’t find a good argument to support any answer to
our question, our question might be wrong and we
should reconsider it.
3. Communicate the argument
The passage containing our argument should be
well-written and easy to diagram.
Tips:
General Writing Advice
To help ensure that our passage is wellwritten, we should use complete sentences; we
should make sure that all of our simple sentences
have a subject and predicate, and that all
connectives in our compound sentences are
connecting smaller complete sentences.
19
We should use our working vocabulary, and
we should avoid specialized terminology like
“ultimate conclusion,” “subconclusion,”
“premises,” or “inference.”
If we wish, we can use unimportant
statements to set the stage for our argument, and
express some important ideas as statement
questions, statement commands and masking
statements. We can also add some normal question
or command sentences for rhetorical flourish.
Placement of the Ultimate Conclusion
If we decide to state the ultimate conclusion,
we should generally put it near the beginning of the
argument, unless it’s controversial, in which case
we should put it near the end of the argument. We
may put our conclusion near the middle of a
passage, as long as we put it between independent
lines of reasoning.
Placement of the Other Ideas
To make our argument as easy as possible to
diagram, the proximity of the ideas in our passage
should reflect the proximity of the ideas in the
diagram.
We may repeat ideas, if this will help our
reader to understand how these ideas work together.
Leaving Conclusions Unstated
We can leave a subconclusion unstated if
it’s pretty obvious, given the reasons from which it
comes, and the inference that uses the two “parent
reasons” instead of the subconclusion is not much
20
harder to follow than the inference that uses the
missing subconclusion.
We can leave our ultimate conclusion
unstated if it’s pretty obvious, given the reasons
from which it comes, and if we believe that it would
be more persuasive to allow our readers to draw this
conclusion themselves.
Highlighting Inferences
To make the inferences easy to spot, we
should use inference indicator expressions
whenever we think that an inference would be hard
to recognize without them and we should write the
argument “vertically,” up and down the arrows,
rather than “horizontally.”
Highlighting Independent Lines of Reasoning
If our argument has independent lines of
reasoning, we should take care to help our readers
to individuate them.
SPOKEN ARGUMENTS, READING ADVICE,
AND WRITING TIPS
Spoken Arguments
We start by making an unnumbered list of the
speaker’s important ideas.
After the we’ve heard the argument, review the list,
we identify the ultimate conclusion, and start
our numbered list with that.
We complete the numbered list of important ideas
by following the ultimate conclusion with any
21
other ideas from our original notes that still
strike us as important.
We can then analyze and evaluate the argument as
usual.
Reading Advice
General Tips:




We should be patient, both with the author and
with ourselves, if we don’t understand a reading
as well as we’d like to.
We should do our best to understand the words.
We should look up words that we don’t
understand, and if we are familiar with a word,
we should remember that the author may be
defining her terms in particular ways, instead of
relying on their everyday meanings
We should do our best to understand the
sentences. We can break down complex
sentences into their parts. We should remind
ourselves of the referents of any pronouns in the
sentence. We should try to rephrase confusing
sentences. If a sentence is a general claim or
principle, we should find specific examples for
it.
We should focus on units of the right size. As a
rule of thumb, we look for the important ideas in
passages that are one step smaller than the
passage that contains the argument we’re
analyzing.
22




The author may present multiple, interrelated,
positions and arguments, and adopt a different
attitude toward each.
We should apply the principle of charity.
We should tolerate mess and disagreement.
We should be honest with ourselves. We should
not try to fool ourselves into thinking that we
understand something that we know, on some
level, we don’t understand.
1) The First Reading
Read through the writing, if it’s an article. If it’s a
book, read through the chapter or chapter section. If
it’s your own copy, you might want to mark
particularly interesting or important bits with pencil.
Just try to get a sense of what the author is saying
and decide whether or not the piece is interesting or
important enough to read again.
2) The Second Reading
Go through the reading again, either marking the
text, preferably in pencil, or taking notes, preferably
using a word processor.
Take special care to mark in the text or include in
your notes:
1. Organizational cues - This includes summaries of
what will be or has been done, section headings,
transitions, and subject-changes.
2. Background material - This is anything that will
help you to understand the arguments, including
23
guiding questions, definitions of specialized
terminology, description of positions, and
important distinctions.
3. Argumentative material - This includes answers
to the guiding questions, important ideas,
obvious inferences, obvious arguments,
objections to ideas or arguments, and objections
to the objections.
4. Your own responses – This includes reactions of
uncertainty, disapproval, recognition, and
curiosity.
You should ignore:
1. Repetitions of ideas and arguments
2. Clarification of ideas and arguments, including
examples
3. Explanations for why the author or others believe
or do something
4. Tangents
3) The Third Reading
Go over what you’ve marked in the text and polish
your markings, or review the notes you’ve taken
and polish your notes.
Pay special attention to:
1. Organizational cues you’ve noted
Do you want to reorganize or cut any of this
material?
2. Background material you’ve noted
Do you want to reorganize or cut any of this
material?
24
3. Argumentative material you’ve noted
Can you represent the arguments in diagram or
numbered-line form?
4. Your own responses.
Do you want to cut or add any responses of
uncertainty, disapproval, recognition, or
curiosity?
4) The Fourth Reading
Take a serious look at your responses of
uncertainty, disapproval, recognition, or curiosity.
Try to resolve or develop these responses.
Writing Tips
A good position paper should have the following
ten characteristics:
1. The paper should be in the author’s own words.
2. The paper should have a clear purpose.
There are four basic kinds of papers, each with
it’s own objective:
i. Expositive writing consists of summarizing or
setting out a position, an article, an
argument, or the ideas of a given
philosopher, in your own words
ii. Comparative writing compares two or more
positions or arguments, discussing their
connections, what they have in common and
how they differ.
25
iii. Evaluative writing assesses the merit, or
relative merit, of one or more positions or
arguments
iv. Constructive writing defends a point of its
own. It takes up a question, presents a
conclusion, and defends it with an
argument. Usually this will involve an
analysis and evaluation of particularly
relevant and influential work in order to
elucidate or advance your own position, and
it will often involve a response to actual or
potential objections.
3. The paper should be well organized.
4. The paper should flow well.
5. The paper should be clear.
The positions and arguments should be stated in
such a way that they would be understood by a
reasonably intelligent reader who is unfamiliar
with the material.
If you are going to set out an argument
(either your own or another person’s) make
certain to include all of the important ideas and
ensure that the connections between the ideas
are as clear as possible.
6. The paper should be complete.
Flesh out all ideas and arguments in sufficient
detail and ensure that you adequately defend
claims that need defending.
7. The paper should be focused.
Try not to include irrelevant or inessential
material, unrelated the attainment of the paper’s
purpose.
8. The paper should substantively correct.
26
Attribute positions to the right person and
represent those positions correctly. Ensure that
your own reasoning avoids serious errors of fact
or logic.
9. The paper should be mechanically correct,
adhering to the rules of style and usage.
10. The paper should (ideally) be creative.
The process of writing a good paper can be
considered to have six steps.
1. Find something to write about.
i. Find a general question or topic that interests
you.
ii. Locate material on this question or topic.
iii. Decide which material looks most promising.
iv. Read the most promising material, following
the reading advice.
v. Follow the literature trail.
vi. Focus on your response to those readings to
formulate a paper topic.
vii. Articulate your thesis as simply and as
clearly as possible.
2. Defend your position to yourself.
Construct an argument to support your position.
Consider how someone might object to your
position or argument and think about how you
might respond to those objections.
3. Organize your paper.
i. Plan to present your material in an order that
will be easy for your readers to follow.
ii. Plan to present one point at a time.
27
iii. Plan to develop each point in sufficient
detail, and
iv. Plan to finish one thing before starting
another.
4. Write your paper.
5. Review your paper, comparing it to the
characteristics of a good paper.
6. Revise your paper.
28
Notes: