MODULE 2

Analyzing Arguments
James Mathew B. Viernes
 Paraphrasing Arguments

Diagramming Arguments

Table of Context
Complex Argumentative Passages

Problems in Reasoning
 INTRODUCTION

Arguments in everyday life are often exceedingly

complex. Premises may be numerous and in topsy-
turvy order; they may be formulated awkwardly, and
they may be repeated using different words; even
the meaning of premises may be unclear. To sort out
the connections of premises and conclusions so as
to evaluate an argument fairly, we need some
analytical techniques.
Paraphrasing Arguments
Biography

Peter Abelard was born near Nantes, in Brittany,

in 1079 CE, to a noble family. He could have
become a wealthy knight, but rejected such a life,
instead choosing an academic career.

In logic, Abelard explored the relations of

premises and conclusions in deductive
arguments. He was one of the first to emphasize
the syntactic nature of validity. An argument is
valid, he pointed out, not because of the semantic
content of its propositions, but because of the
formal relations among those propositions.
5
The most common, and perhaps the most useful technique for
analysis is paraphrase. We paraphrase an argument by setting forth
its propositions in clear language and in logical order. This may
require the reformulation of sentences, and therefore great care
must be taken to ensure that the paraphrase put forward captures
correctly and completely the argument that was to be analyzed.

6
Effective Paraphrasing Strategies
If you’re having trouble paraphrasing a text effectively, try following these steps:

1.Reread the original passage you wish to paraphrase, looking up any words you do
not recognize, until you think you understand the full meaning of and intention
behind the author's words.
2.Next, cover or hide the passage. Once the passage is hidden from view, write out
the author's idea, in your own words, as if you were explaining it to your instructor or
classmates.
3.After you have finished writing, check your account of the author's idea against the
original. While comparing the two, ask yourself the following questions:
• Have I accurately addressed the author's ideas in a new way that is unique to my
writing style and scholarly voice?
• Have I tried to replicate the author's idea or have I simply changed words around in
his/her original sentence(s)?
4. Last, include a citation, which should contain the author's name, the year, and the
page or paragraph number (if available), directly following your paraphrase.

7
Examples of Paraphrasing

Here is the original source an author

might use in a paper:

Differentiation as an instructional approach promotes a balance

between a student's style and a student's ability. Differentiated
instruction provides the student with options for processing and
internalizing the content, and for constructing new learning in order
to progress academically.

8
Here is an example of a better way to
paraphrase the source.

Teachers use differentiated instruction to help students

learn, allowing the teacher to cater lessons to the way each
student learns and each student's skill (Thompson, 2009).

9
Diagramming Arguments
A second technique for the analysis of arguments is diagramming.
With a diagram we can represent the structure of an argument
graphically; the flow of premises and conclusions is displayed in a
two-dimensional chart, or picture, on the page. A diagram is not
needed for a simple argument, even though drawing one can
enhance our understanding. When an argument is complex, with
many premises entwined in various ways, a diagram can be
exceedingly helpful.
 To construct the diagram of an argument

• We must first number all the propositions it contains, in the order in

which they appear, circling each number.
• Using arrows between the circled numbers, we can then construct a
diagram that shows the relations of premises and conclusions without
having to restate them.
• To convey the process of inference on the two-dimensional page, we
adopt this convention: A conclusion always appears in the space below
the premises that give it support; coordinate premises are put on the
same horizontal level.
• In this way, an argument whose wording may be confusing can be set
forth vividly in iconic form. The structure of the argument is displayed
visually
EXAMPLE NO. 1: Here a straightforward argument that may be readily
diagrammed:
EXAMPLE NO. 2

14
EXAMPLE NO. 3

15
EXAMPLE NO. 4

16
Biography

• William of Ockham, sometimes spelled Occam, (c. 1288–c. 1348)

was an influential Franciscan friar, born in the village in Surrey,
England, after which he was named. Sent while young to a
monastery, he went on to study theology and philosophy at Oxford,
and then at the University of Paris, where he eventually taught.
• William of Ockham was an inventive logician, suggesting that we
might better rely upon a logical system that did not force us to view
all propositions as either true or false (a so-called two-valued logic),
but that a three-valued logic, developed more fully many centuries
later, would permit a better reflection of the state of our knowledge.
Some central logical equivalences, which came later to be known as
De Morgan’s theorems, he well understood and actually wrote out
in words, not having at his disposal the modern notation with which
we now express them.
• A powerful and widely respected mind, William of Ockham was
referred to by many as Doctor Invincibilis—“unconquerable
teacher.”
Complex Argumentative Passages
Some arguments are exceedingly complicated. Analyzing passages in
which several arguments are interwoven, with some propositions
serving as both premises and subconclusions while other propositions
serve only as premises, and still others are repeated in different words,
can be a challenge. The diagramming technique is certainly helpful, but
there is no mechanical way to determine whether the diagram actually
does represent the author’s intent accurately. More than one plausible
interpretation may be offered, and in that case more than one diagram
can reasonably be used to show the logical structure of that passa
20
Problems in Reasoning
In reasoning we advance from premises known (or affirmed for the purpose) to
conclusions. We construct arguments of our own every day, in deciding how we
shall act, in judging the conduct of others, in defending our moral or political
convictions, and so on. Skill in devising good arguments (and in deciding whether
a proffered argument is good) is of enormous value, and this skill can be
improved with practice. Ancient games of reasoning, such as chess and go,
exercise that skill, and there are some widely known commercial games (Clue
and Mastermind are examples) that also have this merit
Alonzo, Kurt, Rudolf, and Willard are four creative artists of great
talent. One is a dancer, one is a painter, one is a singer, and one is a
writer, though not necessarily in that order.
1. Alonzo and Rudolf were in the audience the night the singer made
his debut on the concert stage.
2. Both Kurt and the writer have had their portraits painted from life
by the painter.
3. The writer, whose biography of Willard was a best-seller, is
planning to write a biography of Alonzo.
4. Alonzo has never heard of Rudolf. What is each man’s artistic field?

23
Note:
Retrograde analysis Reasoning that
seeks to explain how things must
have developed from what went
before.

24
25
EXERCISE : Diagram each of the following passages, which may contain more than one
argument.

1. An outstanding advantage of nuclear over fossil fuel energy is how easy it is to deal with the waste it
produces. Burning fossil fuels produces 27,000 million tons of carbon dioxide yearly, enough to make,
if solidified, a mountain nearly one mile high with a base twelve miles in circumference. The same
quantity of energy produced from nuclear fission reactions would generate two million times less
waste, and it would occupy a sixteen-meter cube. All of the high-level waste produced in a year from
a nuclear power station would occupy a space about a cubic meter in size and would fit safely in a
concrete pit. —James Lovelock, The Revenge of Gaia: Earth’s Climate Crisis and the Fate of Humanity
(New York: Basic Books, 2006)

2. In a recent attack upon the evils of suburban sprawl, the authors argue as follows: The dominant
characteristic of sprawl is that each component of a community— housing, shopping centers, office
parks, and civic institutions—is segregated, physically separated from the others, causing the residents
of suburbia to spend an inordinate amount of time and money moving from one place to the next.
And since nearly everyone drives alone, even a sparsely populated area can generate the traffic of a
much larger traditional town.