Chap.3

55

Arguments in Standard Form

Indicate which of the following italicized words or phrases is a reason marker, a conclusion marker, or neither.

1. He apologized, so you should forgive him. 2. She apologized. Accordingly, you should forgive her. 3. Since he apologized, you should forgive him. 4. Provided that they apologized, you should forgive them. 5. In view of the fact that she apologized, you should forgive her. 6. He apologized. Ergo, you should forgive him. 7. Given that they apologized, you should forgive them. 8. She apologized, and because of that you should forgive her. 9. After he apologizes, you should forgive him.

10. She apologized. As a result, you should forgive her. 11. Seeing as they apologized, you should forgive them. 12. He apologized. For that reason alone, you should forgive him.

Exercise I

ARGUMENTS IN STANDARD FORM

Because arguments come in all shapes and forms, it will help to have a standard way of presenting arguments. For centuries, logicians have used a format of the following kind:

(1) All men are mortal. (2) Socrates is a man. (3) Socrates is mortal. (from 1–2)

Don't forget the "neither" option!

56

CHAPTER 3 ■ The Language of Argument

The reasons (or premises) are listed and numbered. Then a line is drawn be- low the premises. Next, the conclusion is numbered and written below the line. The symbol “ “, which is read “therefore,” is then added to the left of the conclusion in order to indicate the relation between the premises and the conclusion. Finally, the premises from which the conclusion is supposed to be derived are indicated in parentheses. Arguments presented in this way are said to be in standard form.

The notion of a standard form is useful because it helps us see that the same argument can be expressed in different ways. For example, the follow- ing three sentences formulate the argument that was given in standard form above.

Socrates is mortal, since all men are mortal, and Socrates is a man. All men are mortal, so Socrates is mortal, because he is a man. All men are mortal, and Socrates is a man, which goes to show that

Socrates is mortal. More important, by putting arguments into standard form, we perform

the most obvious, and in some ways most important, step in the analysis of an argument: the identification of its premises and conclusion.

(1) Identify which of the following sentences expresses an argument. For each that is an argument, (2) identify the argument marker (or markers), labeling them as either reason markers or conclusion markers, (3) restate the argument in standard form.

1. Since Chicago is north of Boston, and Boston is north of Charleston, Chicago is north of Charleston.

2. Toward evening, clouds formed and the sky grew darker; then the storm broke.

3. Texas has a greater area than Topeka, and Topeka has a greater area than the Bronx Zoo, so Texas has a greater area than the Bronx Zoo.

4. Both houses of Congress may pass a bill, but the president may still veto it.

5. Other airlines will carry more passengers, because United Airlines is on strike.

6. Since Jesse James left town, taking his gang with him, things have been a lot quieter.

7. Things are a lot quieter, because Jesse James left town, taking his gang with him.

8. Witches float because witches are made of wood, and wood floats. 9. The hour is up, so you must hand in your exams.

Exercise III

Note: Remember that when putting an argument into Standard Form it may be necessary to rephrase the claims so that they are complete claims (like a complete sentence, there should be a subject and predicate). In the problems in this exercise the claims are fairly straightforward so you shouldn’t have to do this too much.

61

Some Standards for Evaluat ing Arguments

Indicate whether each of the following arguments is valid and whether it is sound. Explain your answers where necessary.

1. Most professors agree that they are paid too little, so they are. 2. David Letterman is over four feet tall, so he is over two feet tall. 3. Lee can’t run a company right, because he can’t do anything right. 4. Barack Obama is smart and good-looking, so he is smart. 5. Barack Obama is either a Democrat or a Republican, so he is a Democrat. 6. Since Jimmy Carter was president, he must have won an election. 7. Since Gerald Ford was president, he must have won an election. 8. People who live in the Carolinas live in either North Carolina or

South Carolina. Hillary Clinton does not live in North Carolina or South Carolina. Hence, she does not live in the Carolinas.

9. If all of Illinois were in Canada, then Chicago would be in Canada. But Chicago is not in Canada. Therefore, not all of Illinois is in Canada.

10. If George lives in Crawford, then George lives in Texas. If George lives in Texas, then George lives in the United States. Hence, if George lives in Crawford, he lives in the United States.

11. There can’t be a largest six-digit number, because six-digit numbers are numbers, and there is no largest number.

Exercise IV

Assume that the following sentences are either true (T) or false (F) as indicated.

All my children are teenagers. (T) All teenagers are students. (T) All teenagers are my children. (F) All my children are students. (T)

Using these assigned values, label each of the following arguments as (a) ei- ther valid or invalid, and (b) either sound or unsound.

1. All my children are teenagers. All teenagers are students.

All my children are students.

2. All my children are students. All teenagers are students.

All my children are teenagers.

Exercise V

(continued)

Note: If you are attempting this exercise before viewing my lecture on validity and soundness, I recommend that you read a selection from Chapter 8 (pg. 215-218 in the 8th Edition of the book). If you don’t have the 8th Edition, this reading chunk goes from the beginning of Chapter 8 up to the first exercise that appears. I recommend reading this chunk after the section on Validity in Chapter 3.

The “explain” aspect is mostly for your benefit – you don’t want to just be making intuitive guesses here! Validity and Soundness are technical standards you want to have a technical grasp of. You may want to do Exercise VI first!

62

CHAPTER 3 ■ The Language of Argument

A PROBLEM AND SOME SOLUTIONS

Although soundness guarantees a true conclusion, we usually expect even more from an argument than soundness. In the first place, an argument can be sound but trivially uninteresting:

(1) Nigeria is in Africa. (2) Nigeria is in Africa. (from 1)

Compare these arguments:

(1) Al Gore was president. (1*) George W. Bush was president.

(2) Frogs are frogs. (2*) Frogs are frogs.

Are these arguments valid? Why or why not? Are they sound? Why or why not? Is anything wrong with the argument on the right side? If so, what?

Discussion Question

3. All teenagers are my children. All my children are students.

All teenagers are students.

4. All teenagers are students. All my children are students.

All my children are students.

Indicate whether each of the following sentences is true. For those that are true, explain why they are true. For those that are false, show why they are false by giving a counterexample.

1. Every argument with a false conclusion is invalid. 2. Every argument with a false premise is invalid. 3. Every argument with a false premise and a false conclusion is invalid. 4. Every argument with a false premise and a true conclusion is invalid. 5. Every argument with true premises and a false conclusion is invalid. 6. Every argument with a true conclusion is sound. 7. Every argument with a false conclusion is unsound.

Exercise VI These problems are just testing your understanding of the concepts of Validity and Soundness by exploring their parameters under different cases. If you are struggling to get any progress on these, look me up for help! This exercise is a good test for whether you've got a principled grasp of what the concepts of validity and soundness are truly about. That doesn't always come easily or quickly, so that's why I encourage reaching out. I've helped many students with this!

68

CHAPTER 3 ■ The Language of Argument

The Republicans have the upper hand in Congress, but only for the time being.

A truce has been declared, but who knows for how long?

Take the first example. There is no opposition between Jones being aggres- sive and his not being dirty. Both would be reasons to pick Jones for our team. However, the assertion that Jones is aggressive might suggest that he is dirty. The “but” clause discounts this suggestion without, of course, deny- ing that Jones is aggressive.

The nuances of discounting terms can be subtle, and a correct analysis is not always easy. All the same, the role of discounting terms is often impor- tant. It can be effective in an argument to beat your opponents to the punch by anticipating and discounting criticisms before your opponents can raise them. The proper use of discounting can also help you avoid side issues and tangents.

Still, discounting terms, like the other argumentative terms we have examined, can be abused. People often spend time discounting weak objec- tions to their views in order to avoid other objections that they know are harder to counter. Another common trick is to discount objections no one would raise. This is called attacking straw men. Consider the following re- mark: “A new building would be great, but it won’t be free.” This does not actually say that the speaker’s opponents think we can build a new building for free, but it does conversationally imply that they think this, because oth- erwise it would be irrelevant to discount that objection. The speaker is thus trying to make the opponents look bad by putting words in their mouths that they would never say themselves. To counter tricks like this, we need to ask whether a discounted criticism is one that really would be raised, and whether there are stronger criticisms that should be raised.

For each of the numbered words or expressions in the following sentences, in- dicate whether it is a reason marker, a conclusion maker, an assuring term, a guarding term, a discounting term, or none of these. Recommended: for any annotations that don't feel obvious to you, try to articulate an argument defending your choice.

1. Although [1] no mechanism has been discovered, most [2] researchers in the field agree [3] that smoking greatly increases the chances [4] of heart disease.

2. Since [5] historically [6] public debt leads to inflation, I maintain [7] that, despite [8] recent trends, inflation will return.

3. Take it from me [9], there hasn’t been a decent center fielder since [10] Joe DiMaggio.

4. Whatever anyone tells you [11], there is little [12] to the rumor that Queen Elizabeth II will step down for [13] her son, Prince Charles.

Exercise VII

Don’t forget that “nothing” is an available option as an answer!

69

E V A L U A T I V E L A N G U A G E

EVALUATIVE LANGUAGE

Arguments are often filled with evaluation. The clearest cases of evaluative language occur when we say that something is good or bad, that some course of action is right or wrong, or that something should or should not (or ought to or ought not to) be done. The meaning of such evaluative terms is very con- troversial, but we can begin to understand evaluative language by asking which acts—linguistic, speech, and conversational—it is used to perform.

Evaluative terms often come into play when one is faced with a choice or decision. If you are deciding which shirt to buy, and a friend tells you, “That one’s nice,” your friend would normally be taken to be prescribing that you buy it. A passenger who says, “That’s the wrong turn,” is telling the driver not to turn that way. In such contexts, evaluative statements are action guiding—that is, they are used to direct someone to do or refrain from doing some action. Evaluative terms do not, however, have such direct prescriptive force when applied to things in remote times or places. Saying that it was wrong for James Earl Ray to assassinate Martin Luther King does not tell Ray not to do anything, for it is idle to address imperatives to people in the past. Someone who says that it would be wrong for the president to pursue a particular policy is not telling the president not to pursue it, unless she happens to be speaking or writing to the president. Nevertheless, even

5. The early deaths of Janis Joplin and Jimi Hendrix show [14] that drugs are really [15] dangerous.

6. I think [16] he is out back somewhere. 7. I think [17], therefore [18] I am. 8. I concede [19] that the evidence is hopelessly [20] weak, but [21] I still think

he is guilty. 9. I deny [22] that I had anything [23] to do with it.

10. The wind has shifted to the northeast, which means [24] that snow is likely [25].

1. Construct three new and interesting examples of statements containing assuring terms.

2. Do the same for guarding terms. 3. Do the same for discounting terms, and indicate which statement is being

discounted in favor of the other. 4. Do the same for argument markers, and indicate what is presented as a

reason for what.

Exercise VIII

74

CHAPTER 3 ■ The Language of Argument

For each of the following sentences, construct two others—one that reverses the evaluative force, and one that is as neutral as possible. The symbol “0” stands for neutral, “+” for positive evaluative force, and “–” for negative eval- uative force. Try to make as little change as possible in the descriptive content of the sentence.

Example: – Professor Conrad is rude. + Professor Conrad is uncompromisingly honest in his criticisms. 0 Professor Conrad often upsets people with his criticisms.

1. – Larry is a lazy lout. 6. – Walter is a weenie. 2. + Brenda is brave. 7. + Carol is caring. 3. – Sally is a snob. 8. – Bill is bossy. 4. + Bartlett is a blast. 9. – Oprah is opinionated. 5. – George is a goody-goody. 10. – This is a Mickey Mouse

exercise.

Exercise X

Be a spin doctor yourself by writing upbeat, good-sounding titles or descrip- tions for the following proposals. Remember that, as a professional spin doc- tor, you should be able to make things you personally hate sound good.

1. Imposing a $1,000 fee on graduating seniors 2. Requiring all students to participate in a twenty-one-meal-per-week food

plan

Exercise XI

Indicate whether the following italicized terms are positively evaluative (E+), negatively evaluative (E–), or simply descriptive (D). Remember, the evalua- tions need not be moral evaluations.

1. Janet is an excellent golfer. 2. The group was playing very loudly. 3. The group was playing too loudly. 4. William was rude to his parents. 5. William shouted at his parents. 6. They mistakenly turned right at

the intersection. 7. Fascists ruled Italy for almost

twenty years. 8. That’s a no-no.

Exercise IX

9. Bummer. 10. Debbie lied. 11. Debbie said something false.

12. Joe copped out.

13. Jake is a bully. 14. Mary Lou was a gold medalist. 15. She is sick.

16. He suffers from a hormonal imbalance. (Note: this is an objectively tricky one to evaluate. Try to articulate why)

Some of these can be tricky but your best guide is to ask yourself if the speaker is making an evaluative claim (not whether you think they have evaluative properties). Focus on what you think the speaker is trying to communicate.

94

CHAPTER 4 ■ The Art of Close Analys is

Read the following advertisement from Equal Exchange (Copyright © 1997, 1998, 1999). For each of the numbered expressions, indicate whether it is a reason marker, a conclusion maker, an assuring term, a guarding term, a discounting term, an evaluative term (+ or -), or none of these.

It may [1] be a little early in the morning to bring this up, but [2] if [3] you buy coffee from large corporations [4], you are inadvertently maintaining the system which keeps small farmers poor [5] while [6] lining the pockets [7] of rich cor- porations. By [8] choosing Equal Exchange coffee, you can [9] help to make a change. We believe in trading directly with small farming cooperatives at mutu- ally agreed-upon prices with a fixed minimum rate. Then [10], should [11] the cof- fee market decline, the farmers are still guaranteed a fair [12] price. So [13] have a cup of Equal Exchange Coffee and make a small farmer happy [14]. Of course [15], your decision to buy Equal Exchange need not be completely altruistic. For [16] we take as much pride in refining the taste of our gourmet [17] coffees as [18] we do in helping [19] the farmers who produce them. For [20] more information about Equal Exchange or to order our line of gourmet, organic, and shade-grown coffee directly, call 1 800 406 8289.

Exercise III

From Equal Exchange. Advertisement. Copyright 1997, 1998, 1999.