Arguments in Context Unit II Argument Analysis Chapter 3 Analysis, Standardization, and Diagramming

ARGUMENT ANALYSIS 27 CHAPTER Analysis , Standardization , and SECTION I INTRODUCTION In this unit , we will focus on argument identification and analysis . Argument identification involves spotting arguments and distinguishing them from their surroundings . We briefly discussed argument identification in Chapter , and saw that we need to be on the lookout for particular words ( since , so , because , and hence ' that frequently indicate the presence of an argument . The other skill we will focus on in this unit is argument analysis . In general , to analyze an argument is to determine its intended structure . As we seen , the crucial elements or bones of any argument are its premises and its conclusion , and we determine an argument structure by identifying these elements and figuring out how they fit together . We are beginning with the skills of identification and analysis in particular because recognizing and accurately determining argumentative structure are prerequisites for accurate evaluation . After all , we ca assess whether an argument is good or bad until we know what the argument is supposed to be ! More precisely , we ca say whether an argument is sound or not , unless we know what its conclusion is , and what premises have been offered on its behalf . Before we get started , it is important to make two notes . First , you are already skilled at argument cation and analysis . Again , these are prerequisites for evaluation , and you have been evaluating arguments almost your whole life . However , these skills are largely intuitive . The goal here , then , is not to develop new skills , but instead to sharpen or enhance existing ones . To this end , we will slow down and think through the steps involved in identification and analysis . By ourselves to argumentative language in this way , we will make what is mostly implicit in everyday practice , explicit . More specifically , this will involve giving names to a variety of argumentative moves and situations , identifying a method for seeing behind an authors words , and learning some techniques for representing arguments . Proceeding in this way will allow us to see in detail how arguments are expressed and structured , and will ultimately put us in a better position to evaluate and engage with arguments . The second note has to do with reading . We will be focusing on arguments in text , and one of the things that we will find is that in all but the simplest cases , argument analysis requires active engagement with the text . We actively engage with a text when we ask questions of it what is the author trying to say ?

What reasons does the author give for the conclusion ?

Why do they believe the premises are true ?

We do not always read actively . When we read a magazine or a novel , we normally sit back and let the author provide us with information or tell us a story . However , when it comes to argument analysis passive reading will not do . In most cases , argument analysis will involve actively looking to the text for clues , and using these clues to 29

30 THADDEUS piece together the author intended argument . Active engagement with a text can be at first , but it is an important skill , and something you will likely find becomes easier with practice . SECTION ANALYZING SIMPLE ARGUMENTS Let start with a simple argument . Ex . Since Banana Republic sale items will go fast , I think we should go there first . The first thing we should notice in this case is the word . This word typically indicates the presence of an argument , and a look back at the context confirms this . Now that we have an argument , how do we analyze it ?

We need to break the argument into its components , its premises and conclusion . Because the word since is not only an argument indicator , but a premise indicator , we know that what follows Banana Republic sale items will go fast being used as a premise . This premise supports the we should go there first which is the conclusion . We have captured all there is to say about this ment structure , and so our analysis is complete . importantly , what makes this argument simple , as we will use the term , is not that it is short or easy to understand . instead , this argument is simple because it draws only one conclusion . As we will see later in the chapter , simple arguments can be chained together to form complex arguments . For now , however , let us take a look at another simple argument . Ex . The coach will likely be fired , given the allegations of unethical recruiting practices and the team the last three years . The term and a quick look at the context tells us that we have an argument on our hands . Given is a premise indicator , and in what immediately follows the author makes two claims . The author is claiming that there are allegations of unethical recruiting practices and that the team performance over the last three years has been . The author is offering these two premises as evidence for the proposition that the coach will likely be fired , and so this latter proposition is the conclusion . vi Coaches Shout Instructions by Chris This second example is similar to the first however , we should note two important differences . First , in this example there are two premises , whereas in Ex . there was only one . This does not change the fact that

ANALYSIS , AND 31 like Ex . Ex . is a simple argument . Again , what makes an argument simple is that it draws only one , and this means that simple arguments can have many premises . The second point has to do with order . In Ex . the premise came first and the conclusion last , whereas in Ex . the order is reversed . This teaches us an important lesson premises are not always , nor are conclusions always presented last . As it turns out , in everyday speech and writing , arguments are presented in many different ways . Sometimes , in fact , the conclusion is placed between premises ( as we will see ) SECTION REPRESENTING ARGUMENTATIVE STRUCTURE The point of analyzing an argument is to uncover its structure , and it will be useful to have a uniform or standard way of representing the bones of an argument . For simple arguments we will use the following process of representation . For each distinct part of an argument ( each of its premises and its conclusion ) we will assign a unique number , assigning the highest number to the conclusion . We will then stack the propositions in numerical order , and add a conclusion indicator to the conclusion for clarity . We will call this way of representing an argument , a standardization . In , the argument consists in two propositions the premise and conclusion , and so in our tion we will stack the numbers ) and ) We will assign ) to the conclusion , and then add the conclusion indicator so to the argument . This gives us the following standardization of Ex . Banana Republic sale items will go fast . we should go there first . The argument in Ex . consists of three propositions two premises and the conclusion . As a consequence , our standardization will stack the numbers , and , we will make the conclusion , and add the indicator word so to it . This gives us the following standardization for Ex . There have been allegations of unethical recruiting practices . The team performance over the last three years has been . the coach will likely be fired . arguments is a useful way of representing an argument structure , but it is not the only way . A different way of representing the bones of an argument is called . is a more abstract way of representing arguments that allows us to see an argument structure independently of its subject matter . just as we would in a standardization , we start a diagram by assigning each part ofan argument a number . We start numbering at one and reserve the highest number for the conclusion . This is where the similarity ends , however . First , when , we let the assigned number stand in for the whole proposition we do not rewrite the premises and conclusions as we do in . Second , when we diagram we will use numbers with circles around them to indicate propositions . Third , we will not stack the numbers , but work horizontally to capture the relation between the premise and conclusion . Doing so , requires the use oftwo additional symbols the arrow ( represents the relationship between an argument premises and its conclusion . The arrow points away from the premises , and toward the conclusion the premises port to establish . Further we will use the plus ( The represents the idea that an author intends two or more distinct propositions to be taken together as evidence .

32 THADDEUS The diagram of Ex . looks like this ( Thus , represents the proposition Banana sale items will go fast , while represents the sion that we should go there first . Moreover , the arrow points from to because is the evidence that purports to establish . In the case of Ex . the author offers two pieces of evidence on behalf of his conclusion . and this is reflected here by the conjunction and ( which represent the propositions that there are allegations of unethical recruiting practices and that the team performance over the last three years has been ) Diagram of Ex . It is important to note that standardization and are distinct ways of representing tive structure , and we can use one without the other . That is , we might standardize an argument without it , and vice versa ( though ifyou choose to diagram an argument without also it , you have to find a way connect your numbers to the propositions they represent ) In this unit , however , we will always standardize and diagram examples , and we will use the numbers assigned in the tion ofan argument for the diagram . Now that we have discussed simple arguments , let see how analysis works in more complex cases . SECTION ANALYZING COMPLEX ARGUMENTS A simple argument draws only one conclusion . However , simple arguments can be put together to create complex arguments . As we will see , complex arguments draw one or more on the way to the main conclusion . Consider the following case Ex . You should fill your cars tires with nitrogen instead of plain air for two reasons . First , nitrogen will diffuse through the tire walls much more slowly than plain air , since nitrogen molecules are bigger than molecules of oxygen . Second , filling your tires with nitrogen keeps water vapor from getting inside your tires . Uncovering the structure of this argument means isolating all of the parts and determining their ships . We will begin by using indicator words as our guide . On a first pass , we should be struck by the presence of two indicators two reasons and since . The author is claiming that there are two reasons for thinking that You should fill your car tires with nitrogen instead of plain air . The author has numbered these premises using the term first and second . Thus , these two propositions are premises that port the conclusion that you should put nitrogen in your tires . However , there is one other indicator word since ' This suggests that there is a present . Indeed , the fact that nitrogen are bigger than molecules of oxygen is given as a reason to believe that nitrogen will diffuse through the tire walls more slowly than plain air will . This means the author claim that nitrogen will diffuse is being used as both a premise and a conclusion . On the one hand , it is a premise because it supports the

ANALYSIS , AND 33 proposition that you should fill your tires with nitrogen . On the other , it is a conclusion because it is ported by the proposition that nitrogen molecules are bigger than oxygen molecules . Low Pressure Car Tyres by David Our analysis is complete we have uncovered all the parts of the argument and we know how they are related . In order to represent this argument structure let standardize it . As we learned above , we should assign a number to each relevant proposition reserving the highest number for the conclusion . Wait . There are two conclusions in this argument . Which one should we assign the highest number ?

We will reserve the highest number for the ultimate or main conclusion , which in this case is that You should fill your car tires with nitrogen instead of plain Can we simply assign numbers to the other propositions , and the argument like this Standardization for Ex . Nitrogen will diffuse through the tire walls much more slowly than plain air . Nitrogen molecules are bigger than molecules of oxygen . Filling your tires with nitrogen keeps water vapor from getting inside your tires . So , you should fill your car tires with nitrogen instead of plain air . No . While this standardization captures all the relevant propositions , it misses an important part of the argument structure . Although all ultimately support the conclusion , they do not do so in the same way . The proposition that nitrogen molecules are bigger than molecules only supports the conclusion because it gives evidence for the proposition that nitrogen will diffuse more slowly than plain air . In other words , only supports through its support of let say that offers only indirect support whereas and ) offer direct support , and our representation of the argument needs to reflect this . This means that we need to supplement our basic standardization process . First , let follow the convention that conclusions always come after their premises , so we want to assign the proposition molecules are bigger than molecules of oxygen a higher number than the will diffuse through the tire walls much more slowly than plain air . Second , since the will diffuse is a conclusion , we should make it clear by adding an indicator word to our standardization . Last , when there are multiple inferences in an argument we need to know for sure what premises lead to what conclusion . To mark this , let us agree that after every conclusion we will note the premises from which the proposition is drawn . Following these additional rules gives us the following

34 THADDEUS Standardization for Ex . Nitrogen molecules are bigger than molecules of oxygen . So , nitrogen will diffuse through the tire walls much more slowly than plain air . from ) Filling your tires with nitrogen keeps water vapor from getting inside your tires . So , you should fill your car tires with nitrogen instead of plain air . from and ) What does a diagram of Ex . look like ?

We begin our diagrams with the conclusion . Following the number system we used in the correct standardization of Ex . our main conclusion is , so we should start by ing the number four with a circle around it . Evidence is offered on behalf of this conclusion , so we should draw an arrow to the left of our circled number pointing to it . What evidence is offered on behalf of ?

The propositions numbered ) and ) above are the direct evidence for ) and we should connect these pieces of evidence using a plus since it is clear that the author intends these pieces of evidence to be taken together . Last , as we seen , the author offers ) as evidence for ) so we should draw an arrow to the left of ) pointing to it , and ) to the left ofthat . This gives us the following diagram Diagram for Ex . The diagram of this argument shows very clearly that this complex argument is built out of two simple arguments . Working backwards from the main conclusion , there is the simple argument with and as premises and as the conclusion . In addition , because the author gives a reason for , we have another simple argument from to . Let us turn to some exercises . EXERCISES Exercise Set Directions For each of the following determine whether the passage contains an argument . If it does not , write no argument . If it does , then standardize and diagram the argument . It seems likely that this year will be first as a professional without a major win on account of problems with her short game . Your health care provider will not cover this test on the grounds that it is neither medically necessary nor an expense covered by your policy .

ANALYSIS , AND 35 Disney was the first studio to release a truly massive film originally set for theaters onto a streaming form . To watch their latest version of Mulan , viewers needed to pay close to 30 on top of their subscription . judging from the astonishing range of daily life and human endeavor reflected in his poems and plays , we can only infer that Shakespeare was a keen observer . You are not eligible for an upgrade , since you have signed up for our newsletter , and signing up is for eligibility . Advisory boards are limited in authority , and consequently in legal responsibility , to those powers granted by the local government . Exercise Set Directions For each of the following determine whether the passage contains an argument . If it does not , write no argument . If it does , then standardize and diagram the argument . We can be sure that the murder was committed by thejudge , given that it had to be either the butler or the judge , and we know it was the butler since he was passionately in love with the victim . Since goat milk contains smaller fat globules than cow milk , it is easier to digest than cow milk . goat milk may be a viable alternative for children who have a difficulty digesting cow milk . To insert genes into a cell , scientists often prick it with a tiny glass pipette and inject a solution with the new DNA . The extra liquid and the pipette itself , however , can destroy it . In place of a pipette , scientists at have developed a silicon lance . They apply a positive charge to the lance so that the negative charged DNA sticks . When the device enters a cell , the charge is reversed and the DNA is set free . In a recent study using this method , 72 percent of nearly mouse eggs cells The proposed ban on magazines does make any sense . Think about it a ban on ity magazines would necessarily prevent any of these mass killings , since with practice a person can learn to swap out a depleted round magazine in a couple of seconds or less .

36 THADDEUS Because attention is a limited can attend to only 110 bits of information per second , or 173 billion bits in an average choice of attentional targets determines , in a very real sense , the shape of our The chief reason painting is superior to sculpture is that painting as a medium affords the artist many more possibilities than sculpture does . After all , how can you sculpt mist or clouds , or the appearance of tive surfaces ?

Likewise , in painting the artist can represent impossible objects , and this is not an option for the sculptor who is bound by the laws of space and time . Exercise Set Make up a complex argument and write it out . Once you done this , standardize and diagram your ment . Below is a standardized argument without any content . Draw the diagram that corresponds to this . So , from and ) So , from ) So , from ) Below is an argument diagram . Create the standardization that corresponds to this diagram ( do worry about content , just follow the pattern from above ) What is a rhetorical question ?

Give an example . Can a rhetorical question be part ofan argument ?

ANALYSIS , STANDARDIZATION , AND Notes 37 , Adapted from , 2014 , Hold Still . 311 ( Adapted from Anderson , 2009 , May 25 ) In Defense of Distraction . New York . 43 ( 18 )