Argument
An argument is an inference made public — a collected series of statements intended to establish a proposition. It is a social exchange that allows reasoning to be explicitly constructed, rehearsed, justified, and evaluated. Arguments turn private, potentially flawed mental processes into something anyone can inspect.
How It Appears Per Course
PHIL 252
Argument is the central tool of the entire course. Introduced in Unit 2 as the public counterpart to private inference, then formalized in Unit 3 (validity and standard form), extended through definition in Unit 4, expressed categorically in Unit 5, and analyzed for informal fallacies in Unit 6.
The Three Components of Every Argument
- Premises — statements offered as evidence or reasons. The “legs of the table.”
- Conclusion — the main claim the argument is trying to establish. The “tabletop.”
- Support Relationship — the assertion that if the premises are true, the conclusion is true (or likely). The “hardware.”
If any leg is weak (false premise) or the hardware is loose (poor support), the table collapses.
Argument vs. Inference
| Inference | Argument | |
|---|---|---|
| Nature | Private mental process | Public social exchange |
| Accessibility | Limited by memory, bias, self-analysis | Open to construction, evaluation, criticism |
| Goal | Individual understanding | Persuasion and scrutiny by others |
The goal of critical thinking is to move from private inference to public argument.
Standard Form
Premises listed vertically above a horizontal line, conclusion below. Makes structure visible.
Premise 1: All humans are mortal.
Premise 2: Socrates is human.
─────────────────────────────
Conclusion: Socrates is mortal.
Indicator Words
- Premise indicators: since, because, given that, owing to
- Conclusion indicators: therefore, thus, hence, as a result, in conclusion
Deductive vs. Inductive Arguments
| Type | Standard | Conclusion Strength |
|---|---|---|
| Deductive | Validity — premises guarantee conclusion | Certain (if valid and premises true) |
| Inductive | Strength — premises make conclusion probable | Probable (never certain) |
Cross-Course Connections
Cogency — the informal standard a good argument must meet
Validity — the formal standard for deductive arguments
Enthymeme — arguments often have unstated (implicit) premises
InformalFallacies — arguments that violate reasoning standards
Key Points for Exam/Study
- Arguments are not the same as disputes or disagreements — they are structured logical cases
- Not every sentence is a statement; not every sentence cluster is an argument
- Propositions = fixed meanings of sentences (sentences can be ambiguous; propositions are not)
- An argument is public — once a thought is given verbal expression, it is open to criticism
- The support relationship is the glue: it asserts “if premises, then conclusion”
Open Questions
- What makes a support relationship strong enough? (The answer leads to cogency and inductive standards)