Reasoned Argument
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
A Reasoned Argument is an argument/inference (composed of supporting statements and conclusions) that makes use of reasoning.
- AKA: Line of Reasoning, Reasoned Inference.
- Context:
- It can range from being a Valid Reasoned Argument to being an Invalid Reasoned Argument.
- It can range from being a Deductive Argument to being an Inductive Argument to being an Abductive Argument.
- It can range from being a Principled Argument to being an Intuitive Argument.
- It can range from being a Formal Argument to being an Informal Argument.
- It can (often) be the output of a Reasoning Task.
- It can (often) be decomposed into Argument Premises, Argument Operations, and Argument Conclusion.
- It can range from being a Formally Reasoned (Rational) Argument to being an Informally Reasoned (Common Sense) Argument.
- Example(s):
- a Rational Argument.
- a Logic-based Argument.
- a Moral Argument.
- …
- Counter-Example(s):
- See: Inference, Reasoning Task, Irrational Decision, Inductive Argument, Transcendental Arguments, Interpretation (Logic), Proposition, Statement (Logic), Formal Language, Deductive Argument.
References
2016
- (Wikipedia, 2016) ⇒ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/argument Retrieved:2016-10-19.
- In philosophy and logic, an argument is a series of statements typically used to persuade someone of something or to present reasons for accepting a conclusion. [1] [2] The general form of an argument in a natural language is that of premises (typically in the form of propositions, statements or sentences) in support of a claim: the conclusion. [3] [4] [5] The structure of some arguments can also be set out in a formal language, and formally defined "arguments" can be made independently of natural language arguments, as in math, logic, and computer science. In a typical deductive argument, the premises guarantee the truth of the conclusion, while in an inductive argument, they are thought to provide reasons supporting the conclusion's probable truth. [6] The standards for evaluating non-deductive arguments may rest on different or additional criteria than truth, for example, the persuasiveness of so-called "indispensability claims" in transcendental arguments, [7] the quality of hypotheses in retroduction, or even the disclosure of new possibilities for thinking and acting. The standards and criteria used in evaluating arguments and their forms of reasoning are studied in logic. [8] Ways of formulating arguments effectively are studied in rhetoric (see also: argumentation theory). An argument in a formal language shows the logical form of the symbolically represented or natural language arguments obtained by its interpretations.
- ↑ "Argument", Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy." "In everyday life, we often use the word "argument" to mean a verbal dispute or disagreement. This is not the way this word is usually used in philosophy. However, the two uses are related. Normally, when two people verbally disagree with each other, each person attempts to convince the other that his/her viewpoint is the right one. Unless he or she merely results to name calling or threats, he or she typically presents an argument for his or her position, in the sense described above. In philosophy, "arguments" are those statements a person makes in the attempt to convince someone of something, or present reasons for accepting a given conclusion."
- ↑ Ralph H. Johnson, Manifest Rationality: A pragmatic theory of argument (New Jersey: Laurence Erlbaum, 2000), 46-49.
- ↑ Ralph H. Johnson, Manifest Rationality: A pragmatic theory of argument (New Jersey: Laurence Erlbaum, 2000), 46.
- ↑ The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, 2nd Ed. CUM, 1995 "Argument: a sequence of statements such that some of them (the premises) purport to give reason to accept another of them, the conclusion"
- ↑ Stanford Enc. Phil., Classical Logic
- ↑ "Deductive and Inductive Arguments," Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
- ↑ hCharles Taylor, "The Validity of Transcendental Arguments", Philosophical Arguments (Harvard, 1995), 20-33. "[Transcendental] arguments consist of a string of what one could call indispensability claims. They move from their starting points to their conclusions by showing that the condition stated in the conclusion is indispensable to the feature identified at the start… Thus we could spell out Kant's transcendental deduction in the first edition in three stages: experience must have an object, that is, be of something; for this it must be coherent; and to be coherent it must be shaped by the understanding through the categories."
- ↑ "Argument", Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy."
2004
- http://faculty.uncfsu.edu/jyoung/argument.htm
- QUOTE: "Argument" is the most fundamental concept in our study of critical thinking. Much of this course will be devoted to identifying, developing, and evaluating arguments. We will study valid and invalid forms of arguments, strong and weak arguments, causal arguments, analogical arguments, and arguments based on generalizations. The significance of arguments to critical thinking makes it important for all of us to understand the term, and its relationship to some of the basic language of the critical thinking course.
The word "argument" is often used in everyday language to refer to a heated dispute, a quarrel, a shouting match. Please take note that we will not be using argument in this sense throughout this course. Instead, "argument," as we will be using the term refers to "a set of propositions, or statements, which are designed to convince a reader or listener of a claim, or conclusion, and which include at least one reason (premise) for accepting the conclusion."
- QUOTE: "Argument" is the most fundamental concept in our study of critical thinking. Much of this course will be devoted to identifying, developing, and evaluating arguments. We will study valid and invalid forms of arguments, strong and weak arguments, causal arguments, analogical arguments, and arguments based on generalizations. The significance of arguments to critical thinking makes it important for all of us to understand the term, and its relationship to some of the basic language of the critical thinking course.