Repairing Arguments

I have been in many situations where I will try and argue/reason with a friend about a topic and she will not understand what I am talking about. Most times this occurs when I am more knowledgeable about a subject then my friend and they get lost in my reasoning because I jump from a premise to a conclusion without giving them a valid explanation/argument. After reading this section I understand the importance of being able to mentally repair my arguments I use in order to make them valid. An example of an argument that needs to be repaired is:

I have never seen Amber eat cheese therefore Amber must not like cheese.

This argument is not good because there is no argument linking the premise to the conclusion. It is possible that I have just not been around Amber enough to witness her eating cheese. In order to make the premise and conclusion stick together we need to add a premise. Something like Amber always specially orders food without cheese or that she is highly lactose intolerant would make the overall argument stronger thus linking the premise to the conclusion.

team building

Most organizations utilize a system of team building rather than having one person in charge to dictate. This system works because it gives everyone in the group a chance to interact and share ideas while still having a leader in charge. This interaction helps to build a stronger relationship between group members which is important in the sharing of ideas. When there is a poor relationship between members the group is less productive and it can take longer to get things done. When I was in a group once we were told to come up with an idea to sell a product. Luckily, my group and I worked very well together. One girl stepped up and took charge and instead of splitting up the assignment we worked together from start to finish. This worked really well for us because we all got to contribute in picking a product and our approach for selling it. On the day of the presentation we did very well. We were all on the same page and were able to deliver our product well while other groups argued in front of the class and by the end no one even knew what they were trying to present.

Burden of Proof Fallacy

The Burden of Proof fallacy also known as the Appeal to Ignorance is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. Using this fallacy not only gets rid of having a rational discussion but can be misleading. A common example of this fallacy is in the American law where a person is innocent until proven guilty. This places the burden of proving this person guilty on the prosecution. Another example of this fallacy is one I heard recently while spending time with my six and eleven year old nephews during our vacation in Germany this past summer. My two nephews Donny and Ian were arguing over if Santa Claus is real. Ian, who had found out the truth about Santa, decided to tell Donny that Santa wasn’t real in order to pick on him. I thought Donny would cry when he found out the truth but instead he replied, “How do you know that? Have you been around the entire North Pole and looked to see if you found Santa’s workshop because if you haven’t then you don’t know anything.” Ian was speechless after Donny said that and got angry and stomped upstairs. At the time I was proud of my little nephew for sticking up for himself and winning the argument however now I see he won by using a fallacy.

Analyzing Complex Arguments

My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the cars in his yard 1. People do not like living next door to such a mess 2. He never drives any of them 3. They all look old and beat up and leak oil all over the place 4. It is bad for the neighborhood, and it will decrease property values 5.

Argument: yes

Conclusion: My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the cars in his yard.

Additional premises needed: If he never drives any of them, they all look old and beat up and leak oil all over the place, and people don’t like living next to such a mess then it is bad for the neighborhood and decreases property value

Sub arguments: 2,3,4,5 support the conclusion of 1:

Good argument: This is a good argument once the additional premise is written in full because it makes the overall argument clearer. Since 2,3,4,5 are not all independent it makes more sense for 2,3,4 to support 5 which leads to the conclusion of 1.

I found this exercise very useful although it took me awhile to understand how they were analyzing these arguments. After i got the hang of it i thought it was very useful in not only being able to correct examples from the book but it also will help me to notice  bad argument if I'm listening to someone or presenting something myself. This exercise will help me make sure I'm being clear when making arguments which in turn will make my argument more effective

Tests for a good argument

There are three tests an argument must pass in order for it to be considered good. Each testis independent of the others so one can fail while the others pass. The first test is that the argument should be plausible. An example of this would be stating that candy is bad for your health. Because research shows that consistently eating candy is bad for you, we can conclude that the argument is plausible. The second test is that the premises should be more plausible than the conclusion. For example if we say that candy is bad for your health so people should eat less candy and more vegetables. It is not plausible for the argument to be true and the conclusion to be false since people know from experience that eating healthy foods such as vegetables makes you feel better. Lastly, in order for an argument to be good it must be valid and/or strong. An example of this would be that after eating a lot of candy and junk food over the years my body started to gain weight and feel sluggish. I heard that eating balanced meals and more vegetables would make me feel healthier. I am now in good shape and have lots more energy.

Plausible Vs Implausible claims

In Chapter three Epstein discusses the premises of an argument. It is mentioned that from a false premise we can prove anything so it is important to make sure that the premise is true in order for the argument to be good. When a person has a good reason to trust that the point being made is true and valid, it is known as a plausible claim. An example of this would be that dogs like treats. This is plausible because usually dogs get very excited when there owner offers them a treat. It becomes seen as an award for good behavior and often used to train dogs. An example of an implausible claim would be that pigs can fly. This argument is often used as a way of stating that something is not going to happen but because we all know this argument is completely false it make it an implausible claim.

Strong Vs. Valid arguments

An argument is strong when it is possible to have a true premise but a false conclusion. In a strong argument a person would evaluate the strength depending on the likelihood of the argument to occur. Whereas in a valid argument there is no way to have a true premise and a false conclusion. Unlike strong arguments there is no judgment involved.


Valid Argument-All zebras have stripes on them.
So the Zebras at the San Diego zoo have stripes on them.
Because it is a fact that all zebras have stripes this premise nor the conclusion could be false unless tomorrow scientist create a new breed of zebras.

Strong Argument-All standard sized prints I have seen people order from Walgreens come sized 4x6.
So unless I specify what size prints I want my photos will be developed 4x6.
This argument is strong because I have ordered photos from Walgreens before and unless I specified otherwise the photos would be developed 4x6. However it might not necessarily be valid because I have not ordered photos from every Walgreens in the United States so I don’t know if somewhere in Kansas the standard print size is different.

Subjectivist fallacy

It is almost impossible to find two people who will agree with eachother on more than a few topics. However just because two people cant agree on whether a claim is true doesn’t make it subjective. If an employee tells their boss, “I deserve raise for working all those extra late night shifts” many people might confuse this claim for subjective because the employee stated what they believe to be true. This however is an objective claim because if it were subjective then there would be no point in arguing this with the boss. Just as people mistake objective claims for subjective the same is true vice versa. For example many people think that there opinions of how something looks is objective. I often find myself doing this when my friend wears something I don’t like. I will tell her that her outfit doesn’t match or that it is not cute. When I say these things I often think that I am right and that there is no opposing opinion but my claims are in fact not always right and subjective.

Vague Sentence

I live on 11th street and last night I was unable to fall asleep until three in the morning. There were a lot of people walking up and down the street in huge mobs looking for something to do. One of my friends I live with, who also couldn’t sleep, came into my room and said, “These people mobbing up and down the street are dirty and annoying.” Well not knowing what she meant I assumed she meant the people were dirty in a promiscuous way like they were being inappropriate out in front of our house. When I asked, “Did you tell them to get a room?” She looked very confused. It was then that I realized where I misunderstood her comment. My friend was being vague when she said the groups of people outside our home were dirty. A person being dirty could mean a lot of things from being unclean to promiscuous. Although my friend and I laughed afterwards I now understand the importance if specifying what you mean.