Analyzing Arguments

Analyzing Arguments
Examine the structure of the
argument

Start with identifying the Conclusion

and premises and eliminating excess
verbiage
 Diagramming Arguments
Its clear that we should eliminate
the death penalty. First, the nancial
costs of capital punishment are
signicantly greater than those of
keeping someone in prison for life.
Second, the death penalty has no
greater deterrent value than life in
prison without parole.
 Diagramming Arguments
Not every sentence is a statement or a claim
Indicator words should not be made part of
the identication of claims
Multiple claims can be expressed in a single
sentence
Cocaine is a drug, and drugs are addictive.
Two claims can be joined together in ways
that transform them into single claims
If cocaine is a drug, then it is addictive.
 Diagramming Arguments
Sometimes it may be challenging to
identify when a single sentence
contains more than one claim
because the sentence uses a
parenthetical phrase or buries one
claim within another.
Your house must be infested with
termites. There are mud tubes
running from the soil into cracks of
masonry on the house, which could
only be caused by termites.
 Diagramming Arguments
A single claim can be represented by
more than one sentence
The victim, Erika Silverman, was
stabbed by the defendant, Joe Belser.
Detective Stokes identied Mr. Belsers
DNA on the weapon used to kill the
victim. Therefore, it was Joe Belser
who killed Ms. Silverman.
 Placing Conclusions and
Premises
The detective found the
defendants DNA on the weapon,
thus the defendant must be the
killer.

 Convergent Arguments
Most arguments have more than one
premise supporting the conclusion.
You will need to determine the
relationship between those premises
and then draw the diagram in a way
that reects this relationship.
Arguments with premises that
independently support the conclusion
are convergent arguments
 Convergent Arguments
If one of the premises is false, the
conclusion is still supported because
the remaining premises provide
independent support for the
conclusion.
Cocaine is addictive, and it is illegal.
Consequently, you should not use
cocaine.
 Linked Arguments
When premises depend on each
other to support the conclusion, the
argument is linked
All of the linked premises must be
true in order to support the
conclusion
If one of the premises is false, the
conclusion is no longer supported
Cocaine is a drug, and drugs are
addictive. Therefore, cocaine is
 Representing Convergent and
Linked Arguments
Cocaine is addictive, and it is illegal.
Consequently, you should not use
cocaine.

Cocaine is a drug, and drugs are addictive.
Therefore, cocaine is addictive.
+

 Diagramming Arguments with
Unstated Conclusions
Unless NASA gets congressional
approval for its plan to send a new
mission to the moon, the space
program will most likely disappear.
And congressional approval seems
highly unlikely. The result of this is
obvious, isnt it
 Diagramming Arguments with
Unstated Conclusions
Unless NASA gets congressional
approval for its plan to send a new
mission to the moon, their space
program will most likely disappear.
And congressional approval seems
highly unlikely. The result of this is
obvious, isnt it? The NASA space
program will most likely disappear.
 Diagramming Arguments with
Unstated Conclusions
If you want to do well in this class,
then you must work very hard. And I
know you want to do well in this
class.
If you want to do well in this class,
then you must work very hard. And I
know you want to do well in this
class. You should work very hard in
this class.
 Diagramming Arguments with
Implied Claims (Premises)
Stop playing video games all night.
Otherwise, you may develop carpal
tunnel syndrome.
Stop playing video games all night.
Otherwise, you may develop carpal
tunnel syndrome. You should stop
playing video games all night.
 Diagramming Arguments with
Implied Claims
We should keep the death penalty.
How could a brutal murderer be
allowed to live?
We should keep the death penalty.
How could a brutal murderer be
allowed to live? Those who brutally
murder others should not be allowed
to live.
 Example
The defendant is charged with
murder, and the question is whether
the defendant is actually the person
who committed the drive-by shooting
of the victim (i.e., there is no
question of self-defense or insanity or
accidental death; the only question is
the identity of the person who did
the deed).
 Example
White Jaguar automobiles are quite
unusual in this area. The defendant
owns a white Jaguar, and the car
from which the fatal shots were red
has been identied by several
witnesses as a white Jaguar.
Therefore, there is some reason to
think that the defendant is guilty of
the drive-by murder.
 Linked Arguments
The prosecution must prove the
defendants guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt, and this argument
doesnt come close.
We have three reasons, all
supporting (though not establishing)
the conclusion that the defendant is
guilty.
 Example
We should legalize physician-assisted suicide for
terminally ill patients who wish to hasten their
deaths. First, it is psychologically important that
people have as much control over their situations as
possible, and being able to control the process of
ones death gives some terminally ill patients a very
satisfying and powerful sense of control. Furthermore,
excruciating pain is always undesirable, and some
forms of disease cause excruciating pain that can
only be relieved by death. And nally, competent
people should have the right to make their own
decisions about their lives and deaths.
 Convergent Arguments
There are three convergent lines
leading to the conclusion: the rst is
the argument concerning control, the
second the argument about pain, and
the third the claim concerning rights.
But the rst and second of these
convergent lines are linked
arguments.
 Convergent Arguments
Control of death is an important form of control
Control is psychologically important

Pain is undesirable
Death is the only means of ending some kind of
pain

Competent people have the right to make their own

decisions

Legalize physician-assisted suicide

 Arguments and
Subarguments
Frequently, a passage has multiple arguments
because there are one or more subarguments.
A subargument is an argument whose premise(s)
provide support for a premise of another argument.
In these cases, the conclusion of the subargument is
a premise of the main argument.
I studied more than 10 hours for my nal exam,
thus I should do well on it. Consequently, my
semester grade will be up to passing level.
 Arguments and
Subarguments
I studied more than 10 hours for my nal
exam, thus I should do well on it.

Consequently, my semester grade will be
up to passing level.
?

 Arguments and
Subarguments
I studied more than 10 hours for my
nal exam, thus I should do well on it.
Consequently, my semester grade will
be up to passing level.