philosophy paper
zc7
analyze_argument.pptx
Based on A 10-Step Process for Analyzing an Argument
by Brian W. Carver
How to Analyze an Argument A 13-Step Process Stacey E. Ake
Important!
When analyzing an argument, one has to get to both the structure and the content of the argument.
The following is a set of questions allowing you to do that.
And remember: for an argument to be sound, it must have a valid form and true premises.
You are given an assignment at the end of this PowerPoint presentation. Please complete it.
Please turn it in during class on February 23rd.
Here is the argument to be analyzed
RIGHT TO ACCURATE MEDICAL INFO – LETTER TO DOCTOR Letter in Word format Please print out this document.
This is the product of the Satanic Temple.
The Satanic Temple is a parody. It is not serious.
More information about the issue can be found here: https://news.vice.com/article/the-satanic-temple-wants-to-use-hobby-lobby-against-informed-consent-abortion-laws
Step 01
What is the author's conclusion?
Note: The conclusion is not always found at the end of an article.
Here the author’s conclusion is in the 3rd full paragraph.
“I regard any information required by state statute to be communicated or offered to me as a precondition for an abortion (separate and apart from any other medical procedure) is based on politics and not science ("Political Information")….The communication of Political Information to me imposes an unwanted and substantial burden on my religious beliefs.”
Step 02
What premises does the author provide to support this conclusion?
Again, paragraph 3.
“I regard Political Information as a state sanctioned attempt to discourage abortion by compelling my consideration of the current and future condition of my fetal or embryonic tissue separate and apart from my body.”
“I do not regard Political Information to be scientifically true or accurate or even relevant to my medical decisions.”
Step 03
What evidence does the author provide to support these premises?
The author is clarifying a personal position.
Thus, this letter is a series of assertions put together by the author. They speak to the author’s beliefs.
This argument precedes without evidence of a traditional kind.
What is important is how the author’s assertions follow one another.
Types of Evidence
Statistical Evidence: Very common. Often abused due to people’s lack of understanding of statistics.
Testimonial Evidence: This is a form of the fallacy of appeal to authority. However, the idea here is that you are using a legitimate authority.
Anecdotal Evidence: The use of examples from the real world. Useful in disproving a statement by showing an exception to the statement. However, can run the risk of being a hasty generalization.
Analogical Evidence: Using a known factor to explain an unknown factor. Some analogies are more powerful (explicative) than others. But remember: all analogies break down at some point.
Step 04
What reality assumptions are required for the author's argument to work?
My body is inviolable and subject to my will alone.
I make any decision regarding my health based on the best scientific understanding of the world….
My inviolable body includes any fetal or embryonic tissue I carry so long as that tissue is unable to survive outside my body as an independent human being.
…I may, in good conscience, disregard the current or future condition of any fetal or embryonic tissue I carry in making that decision.
Step 05
What value assumptions is the author making?
Making decisions based on scientific evidence is good.
Informed consent is good.
Political Information is bad.
Discouraging abortion is bad.
I, and I alone, should make my own decisions.
Step 06
Do the premises seem rational? If not, explain.
So, what do you think?
Step 07
Do the assumptions seem reasonable? If not, explain.
So, what do you think?
Step 08
Are all terms in the argument adequately defined? If not, explain.
Inviolable?
Comport?
Fetal or embryonic tissue?
Informed consent?
State statute?
Science?
Independent medical judgment?
Step 09
Is there other evidence or information, not discussed, that would be helpful to know in evaluating the argument? If so, explain.
Examples of “scientifically true and accurate information.”
Evidence that “Political Information [is] a state sanctioned attempt to discourage abortion.”
Evidence that “Political Information” is not scientifically true or accurate.
Step 10
Does the author use loaded language in order to influence our response? If so, explain.
“Inviolable body”
“Scientifically true”
“Sincerely held religious beliefs”
“Political Information”
“Substantial burden”
None of these adjectives is necessary to the meaning of the noun it modifies.
Step 11
Does the author engage in any informal or red herring fallacies?
Appeal to Emotion: “The doctor-patient relationship is built on trust. I trust that you will honor my religious beliefs…”.
Equivocation: “The doctor-patient relationship is built on trust. I trust that you will honor my religious beliefs…”.
Step 12
Is the argument valid?
That is, suppose the premises and assumptions are true, does the conclusion have to follow? (Does the structure of the argument work? If so the argument is valid; if not, it is invalid.) If a clear valid/invalid answer is difficult, explain why.
What do you think?
Step 13
In your opinion, is the argument sound?
Does it both have a valid form and have all true premises and assumptions? (If so, it is sound; if not, it is unsound.) Explain your answer.
What do you think?
THE BIG QUESTIONS
Is this argument perceived to be sound if you agree with its assumptions and premises? I.e., already believe them to be true.
Is this argument perceived to be unsound if you disagree with the assumptions and premises? I.e., already believe them to be false.
If this is the case, then what role does agreement or disagreement play in our accepting or not accepting the conclusions of an argument?
Is argument truly worthwhile?
Early Hominids Ate Just About Everything
Please look up this article and examine it closely.
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-early-hominids-ate.html
Follow the directions in the next slide.
Exercise: Early Hominids Ate….
Analyze the article using the 13 steps.
Identify three premises.
Identify three value assumptions.
Identify three reality assumptions.
Analyze any evidence presented.
Does the evidence actually advance the article’s argument?
What do you think the author’s bias is? Bias can be defined as the framework (perspective) from which the author writes or the direction in which the author is spinning the article.
No author writes without bias. There is no such thing as “fair and balanced” reporting. That is an illusion.
Data say nothing. They must be interpreted, and one interprets data according to one’s biases.
One can also call bias one’s frame of reference.
