The Basics: Arguments and Assumptions

The Basics: Arguments and Assumptions

Definition of Argument

  • An argument is defined as an attempt to persuade, characterized by a line of reasoning that involves one or more claims leading to a conclusion.

Example of an Argument

  • For instance, when John says,

"Since it is raining right now and we don't want to get wet, I think we should delay going outside until it stops,"
he presents:

  • Grounds: It is raining.

  • Warrant: We don't want to get wet.

  • Conclusion: Therefore, we should stay inside until the rain stops.

Critical Thinking

  • Critical thinking refers to the evaluation or assessment of an argument to determine its convincingness.

Evaluation Questions

  • When analyzing John's argument, one might ask:

    • Is it still raining?

    • Is the rain heavy enough to warrant staying indoors?

    • Do I actually care about getting wet?

    • Is there an urgent reason for going outside, rendering the risk of getting wet less significant?

    • Based on the responses, one can choose to agree with the argument and stay inside or deem it unpersuasive and decide to go out.

Components of an Argument

1. Grounds

  • Grounds are statements that reflect claims about reality.

  • Example from John's argument: The straightforward claim that it is currently raining.

  • Evaluation of grounds includes questions like:

    • Is the claim true?

    • Is there enough evidence to evaluate it?

    • Is the evidence strong, or does it have weaknesses?

    • What additional information might be needed?

  • More complex grounds may involve multiple statements and varying forms of evidence (e.g., examples, statistics).

2. Warrants

  • Warrants serve as justifications that invoke shared values.

  • In John's case, the warrant is that no one wants to get wet if it can be avoided.

  • Warrants can be implicit and might go unstated if the speaker and audience share similar values.

  • Example: John might not explicitly state the warrant because it is assumed that avoiding getting wet is a common desire.

  • Criticism of warrants can be uncomfortable, as it often highlights fundamental value disagreements.

3. Conclusion

  • The conclusion is derived logically from the grounds and warrants.

  • It may be indicated with words like "so" or "therefore," but can also be implicit.

  • Alternatively, the argument can be framed as an if… then statement:

If we agree it is raining and that we don't want to get wet, then we conclude we should stay inside.

  • Conclusions can also be critiqued, highlighting other reasons that may warrant a different outcome (e.g., urgency: running out of ice cream).

Philosophical Background

  • The discussion on arguments is influenced by the work of philosopher Stephen Toulmin in The Uses of Argument.

  • Historically, philosophers have explored two subjects regarding arguments:

    • Rhetoric: The study of persuasion, exploring why and how certain arguments are more convincing.

    • Logic: The evaluation of arguments' strength, determining if grounds and warrants sufficiently lead to accepted conclusions.

    • Logicians identify logical fallacies, which are flawed arguments where the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises.

Assumptions in Arguments

  • Every argument is based on certain assumptions, which are often unstated.

  • These assumptions are typically accepted as common knowledge by the speaker and audience.

  • Example: The assumption of gravity applies in many discussions unless specified otherwise.

  • However, some assumptions can lead to misunderstandings, especially in discussions with contrasting religious or political beliefs.

Challenges in Critical Thinking

  • Recognizing our own assumptions can be difficult, as we often take them for granted.

  • Critical Self-Evaluation:

    • It is often easier to critique others' arguments than to evaluate those we agree with or our own.

    • When confronted with opposing views, critical analysis of flawed reasoning may come easily, while our arguments or those by allies may be overlooked.

    • This selective blindness poses a risk, as unchecked arguments can be easily challenged by others.

  • Therefore, it is crucial to critically analyze our own arguments for limitations before presenting them.

Summary of Critical Thinking Temptations

  • All arguments contain grounds, warrants, conclusions, and assumptions.

  • Critical thinking necessitates the assessment of these elements assessing arguments is easiest when there is disagreement, more challenging with agreement, and most difficult when evaluating one's own arguments.

Key Takeaways

  • Critical Thinking entails evaluating all components of arguments:

    • Grounds

    • Warrants

    • Conclusions

    • Assumptions

  • The evaluation process is integral to understanding the strength and effectiveness of an argument.