AP Lang - Claims, Reasoning, Rest of Logical Fallacies

Argument

A process of reasoned inquiry; a persuasive discourse resulting in a coherent and considered movement from claim to conclusion.

Assumption/warrant

A statement taken for granted without proof. A warrant is the assumption on which the claim and evidence depend upon.

-ex: “Teachers should not fail students because failing grades damage a student’s self-confidence”

—it assumes that teachers have a duty not to damage students’ confidence

Assertion

A confident and forceful statement of fact or belief.

Rebuttal

An objection to a claim.

-ex: claim is “Climate change is a naturally occurring cycle that was not impacted by humans”

—rebuttal is “Climate change is caused by humans’ use of fossil fuels”

Claim

Also called assertion or a preposition, a claim states the argument’s main idea or position. A claim differs from a topic or subject in that a claim has to be arguable.

-ex: “Dogs make better pets than cats”

—not everyone agrees with this, evidence must be included to support it

Claim of fact

A claim of fact asserts that something is true or not true.

-ex: “The number of suicides and homicides committed by teenagers, most often young men, has exploded in the last three decades…”

-ex: “The Earth is round", “The sky is blue”

—-this is not based on personal beliefs or opinions, but it can also be supported by evidence if it is good and disproven by evidence if it is bad

Claim of policy

A claim of policy proposes a change

-ex: “Yet one solution continues to elude us, and that is ending the ignorance around mental health, and moving it from the margins of care and into the mainstream where it belongs…”

-ex: “The government should invest more in renewable energy sources”

—-this is based on personal beliefs or opinions, so it is important to pick good evidence to support it

Claim of value

A claim of value argues that something is good or bad, right or wrong

-ex: “There’s a plague in all of our houses, and since it doesn’t announce itself with lumps or spots or protest marches, it has gone unremarked in the quiet suburbs and busy cities were it has been laying waste…”

-ex: “Dogs make better pets than cats”

—-this is based on personal beliefs or opinions, so it is important to pick good evidence to support it

Closed thesis

A close thesis is statement of the main idea of the argument that also previews the major points the writer intends to make.

-ex: “The three-dimenstional characters, exciting plot, and complex themes of the Harry Potter series make them not only legendary children’s books but also enduring literary classics…”

-ex: “The rise of remote work has positively impacted productivity, employee satisfaction, employee satisfaction, and work-life balance”

—-clearly states the main idea and supporting points in a single sentence

Open thesis

An open thesis is one that does not list all the points the writer intends to cover in an essay.

-ex: “The popularity of the Harry Potter series demonstrates that simplicity trumps complexity when it comes to the taste of readers, both young and old.”

-ex: “The death penalty raises ethnical concerns and merits further investigation.”

—this statement is not fully formed or defined in nature

First-hand evidence

Evidence based on something the writer knows, whether it’s from personal experience, observations, or general knowledge of events.

-ex: this can include personal experience, antidotes, or knowledge of current events

Second-hand evidence

Evidence that is accessed through research, reading, and investigation.

-ex: this can include factual/historical information, expert opinion, and quantitative data

Quantitative Evidence

Quantitative evidence includes things that can be measured, cited, counted, or otherwise represented in numbers

-ex: this can include statistics, surveys, polls, census information

Induction

A logical process whereby the writer reasons from particulars to universals, using specific cases in order o draw a conclusion, which is also called a generalization.

—-it is the opposite of deductive reasoning, it goes from specific to general not general to specific

—it requires no strict form like a syllogism, instead, all the relevant evidence must fit the conclusion

-ex:

“Regular exercise promotes weight loss”

“Exercise lowers stress levels”

“Exercise improves mood and outlook”

Conclusion: “Exercise contributes to better health”

Question

In inductive reasoning, usually a question guides ones’ reasoning.

-ex: “How did that living room window get broken?”

—this is like a hypothesis, it needs to be answered by the end

Evidence

In inductive reasoning, specific evidence is provided to answer the question and reach a general conclusion.

-ex:

“There is a baseball on the living-room floor”

“The baseball was not there this morning:

“Some children were playing baseball this afternoon”

“They were playing in the vacant lot across the window”

“They stopped playing a little while ago”

“They aren’t in the vacant lot now”

—this evidence is based off of what you see, it’s called observational or empirical evidence

Conclusion (inductive)

In inductive reasoning, if the evidence is logical, a general conclusion can be reached that makes sense.

-ex: “One of the children hit or threw the ball through the window; then, they all ran away”

Deduction

Deduction is a logical process whereby one reaches a conclusion by starting with a general premise or universal truth (a major premise) and applying it to a specific case (a minor premise). The process of deduction is usually demonstrated in the form of a syllogism.

-ex:

-major premise: “Exercise contributes to better health”

-minor premise: “Yoga is a type of exercise”

-conclusion: “Yoga contributes to better health”

Major premise

In a syllogism, the major premise is a broad statement or generalization that is assumed to be true.

-ex: “tyrannical leaders deserve no loyalty”

Minor premise

In a syllogism, the minor premise is a more specific statement that is related to the major premise.

-ex: “King George III is a tyrannical ruler”

Conclusion (deductive)

In a syllogism, the conclusion connects the major and minor premises to make a specific statement.

-ex: “King George III deserves no loyalty

Syllogism

A logical structure that uses the major premise and minor premise to reach a necessary conclusion. This is a type of deductive reasoning.

-ex:

-major premise: “Exercise contributes to better health”

-minor premise: “Yoga is a type of exercise”

-conclusion: “Yoga contributes to better health”

Euphemism

A mild or indirect word or expression substituted for one considered to be too harsh or blunt when referring to something unpleasant or embarrassing.

—ex: instead of “died” we say “passed away”

—ex: instead of “fired” we use “laid off

Red Herring

The problem may not be with proof or conclusion at all. The problem is that the rationale for the wrong argument - a distraction from the real one.

-deliberately trying to take an argument off track 

-argued changes the issues so that they are irrelevant to the argument presented 

-the rationale is for the wrong argument 

-ex: 

Son: “Wow, Dad, it’s really hard to make a living on my salary.” 

Father: “Consider yourself lucky, son. Why, when I was your age, I only made $40 a week.” 

----this doesn’t address the argument that the son brings up, it’s irrelevant

----the environment is different from the son and the father, so it would make sense that the father’s experience is different 

-ex:

Daughter: “Tommy broke up with me.”

Mother: “That should be the worst of your worries. There are starving children in Africa.” 

----diverts the attention away from the main focus of the argument 

Slippery slope

This fallacy presents a chain of cause and effect whereby the firs cause establishes an irreversible trend, sometimes called the “domino effect.”

—-ex: if I let you skip dinner, then I’ll have to let others skip dinner

—-the proof may be okay, but it leads to the wrong conclusion

—-it’s very exaggerated