Global Perspectives deconstructing and evaluating arguments

• Engels
• Middelbare school
• vwo
• Leerjaar 4

Evaluating Arguments

In paper 1 you need to evaluate arguments. This lessonup is all about arguments and how to evaluate them.

Let's start with what an argument is:

Text

And no... it's not the 'having an argument argument, although this lessonup can help you to debunk your opponent's 

arguments when you're in a fight. :) 

Want to go a little deeper? Watch the explanation on 
https://owl.excelsior.edu/orc/what-to-do-after-reading/analyzing/evaluating-an-argument/

Opinions, facts and arguments are closely related, but very different at the same time, so just to make sure you can keep them apart:

Parts of an argument 

• ISSUE - problem or controversy about which people disagree
  
• CLAIM - the position on the issue
  
• SUPPORT - reasons and evidence that the claim is reasonable and should be accepted
• REFUTATION – counter claim

Types of Support

• REASON - a general statement that supports a claim.
  
• EVIDENCE - consists of facts, statistics, experiences, comparisons, expert testimony, case studies, institutions, and examples that show why the claim is valid.
• EMOTIONAL APPEALS - ideas that are targeted toward needs or values that readers are likely to care about.

Two types of arguments

1. Inductive argument:

reaches a general conclusion from observed specifics

2. Deductive argument:

begins with a major premise and moves toward a more specific statement or minor premise.

Sherlock walks into a dank bedroom with the premise that there have been a rash of murders in this area, so the woman on the floor is likely another victim of that same predator, and then he gathers information — blood, nicotine stains, ash in a corner, a fragment of glass — and narrows the scope of that available information until his premise is the only logical conclusion remaining. This is the kind of logic that, in fact, many of the police in the Sherlock Holmes stories (and our modern world) use; they have a suspect in mind based on previously available information that is not necessarily related to the case, and then they seek out evidence to prove the guilt of that suspect. It’s been proven over time to be a useful tool in crime-solving and law enforcement.... 

Although it sure doesn’t seem like the Sherlock method, how would you call this approach? Deductive or inductive?

The method in this excerpt used by Sherlock is

1. deductive
2. inductive

Inductive reasoning, however, allows Sherlock to extrapolate from the information observed in order to arrive at conclusions about events that have not been observed. 

Here, we see the intrepid detective walking into the scene a blank slate; he has no pre-supposed ideas about what may have taken place. Maybe the woman on the ground died of natural causes, maybe she was murdered, maybe she fell through the ceiling from an airplane flying thousands of miles above. He simply doesn’t know. So he looks. There’s the ash from her cigarette, so she couldn’t have fallen from a great height. There’s the glass from a broken window, but this might have already been broken when she arrived, or it may have been broken in a struggle. Does she have lacerations? Is her dress damp from the rain outside or dry? And he goes on to gather information until he arrives at a conclusion — that still may be incorrect. And yet more information will come and come until he is quite sure he’s arrived at the right conclusion.

Evaluating types of arguments:

• Is it sufficient to support the claim? 
• Is the evidence relevant to the claim? 
• Can the evidence be proven as fact, not opinion? 
• Is there bias?: personal experiences may be biased 
• Watch for leading language : Words that have strong positive or negative connotations like “wise” or “terrible”.  
• Did the author omit (leave out) important information? 
• Are all sides of an argument presented?

Strategies for Evaluating Arguments

 • Look for opposing viewpoints or counter-argument

• Does the author address opposing viewpoints clearly and fairly?

• Does the author refute the opposing viewpoint with logic and relevant evidence

• Identify the claim.

• Outline the reasons to support the claim.

• What types of evidence are used?

• Evaluate the evidence: Is their enough evidence provided and does it make sense?

• What emotional appeals are used?

• Is there language with strong positive or negative connotations?

• Does the author recognize or refute counter arguments?

Be aware of fallacies!!! See next slide....