LOGIC (PHIL 230)
Argument Analysis
About once each week you will need to find what you take to be a “bad” argument somewhere in the literature (book, magazine, newspaper, website). (Do not simply run a search for “logically flawed arguments” – or something to that effect – and then copy out the argument from a website devoted to such matters; this needs to be something you locate on your own.) Your brief, 1-2 pp. assignment should include three parts: (1) Type or copy out the relevant text, along with the bibliographical information. (2) explain what you find troubling with the argument. As the semester progresses you will begin to learn technical terms for some of the errors that you’ll find. Until then, just describe the problem as best you can. (3) If the argument seems salvageable, how might you improve it? Otherwise, offer a brief rebuttal, based on your analysis. Examples: [brief argument] [report functioning like an argument]
1. Find an Argument
The best source of questionable arguments will be “Letters to the Editor” in newspapers and magazines, or in the “Comments” sections of various online websites. Arguments will often be reported in actual newspaper articles, but they generally are not given as such – for that you need to turn to the “Op-Ed” pages.
You should begin with any text at all that you find troubling, that is, some text where something doesn’t sit well with you. We want to examine those texts to discover the problem. (Sometimes it lies in the text, but of course sometimes it lies in the reader.)
Some possible sources: [New York Times] [Washington Post] [The Guardian] [National Public Radio] [Jacobin] [Reason] [National Review] [Fox News] [The Washington Times] [The Federalist]
This first part should include a citation of your text (author, title, publication, date, and URL – if a webpage), followed by the quoted text itself that contains the argument.
2. Analyze the Argument
An argument is a set of reasons that suggests the truth of some claim, which we call the argument’s conclusion. The argument, if stated fully and clearly, will give the conclusion as well as one or more reasons (or evidence) for believing the claim. These reasons are what we call premises. A good argument (what we call a sound argument) needs to have true premises that support the truth of the conclusion. Please note that a sound argument involves two things: (1) true premises as well as (2) a supporting relationship between the premises and the conclusion. This support is what we call the inference – it is the logical relationship between the premises and the conclusion.
When you are confronted by what strikes you as a bad argument, it could be that you find one or more of the premises questionable, or you might find the connection between the premises and the conclusion questionable, or both. Getting clearer on both of these problems, and on the various forms that these problems can assume, is our main task in this class.
3. Evaluate the Argument
People normally react positively or negatively to an argument before they fully understand it – that’s pretty much how human beings are – and so we need to exercise extra caution here. Our first evaluation of the text grabs our attention, but then we need to back up and analyse it (as in step two, above). Only after we have come to a clearer understanding of the argument are we in a position to responsibly evaluate the argument – is it good or bad, and why. We are also in a much better position to offer advice on strengthening the argument, or on finding an alternative argument that is better. So this final part of your writing assignment is a simple thumbs up or down, along with suggestions on either improving the argument or else locating a more convincing alternative.
Manchester University // Registrar // Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies // Last updated: 1 Aug 2019