Detailed Notes on Evaluating Arguments and Tests

Overview of Evaluating Arguments

  • Importance of understanding argument evaluation in critical thinking and academic work.
  • Distinguish between BS and lying, understanding the motivations and frequency of BS-ing.
  • Practical application in research projects: Ensure the validity of claims to prevent accusations of BS.

Tests for Evaluating Arguments

  1. Truthfulness of Premises

    • Premises must be true to support the argument's conclusion.
    • Truth cannot be constructed on falsehoods.
    • Challenges:
      • Testing assumptions may be difficult.
      • Probabilistic social science often complicates premise validation.
    • Multiple premises can be present; rejecting one does not automatically invalidate the conclusion.

  2. Logical Strength

    • The premise's truth should lead to a probable truth in the conclusion.
    • Example:
      • Premise: Free riders are common in large groups.
      • Premise: Polities (countries) are large groups.
      • Conclusion: Therefore, free riders are common in polities.

  3. Relevance

    • The conclusion must logically connect to the premises; all premises must relate to the argument topic.
    • Quote: "The conclusion must tie into the premise, and each premise must be on topic or to the point." (New School)

  4. Non-Circularity

    • Avoid arguments where premises merely restate the conclusion without proof.
    • Example of Circular Reasoning:
      • "President Reagan was a great communicator because he had the knack of talking effectively to the people."
      • The terms 'great communicator' and 'talking effectively' are interchangeable and don't substantiate the claim.

Practical Application

  • Apply evaluations of BS and solid argumentation to opinion pieces (op-eds) before analyzing a related academic political science article.