Structure Of An Argument Critical Thinking

An (simple) argument is a set of one or more premise with a conclusion. A complex argument is a set of arguments with either overlapping premises or conclusions (or both). Complex arguments are very common because many issues and debates are complicated and involve extended reasoning. To understand complex arguments, we need to analyze the logical structure of the reasoning involved. Drawing a diagram can be very helpful.

§1. Argument maps

An argument map is a diagram that captures the logical structure of a simple or complex argument. In the simplest possible case, we have a single premise supporting a single conclusion. Consider this argument :

Death is inevitable. So life is meaningless.

This can be represented in an argument map as follows:

We can also use numbers to label the premises and conclusion. (1) = Life is meaningless, (2) = Death is inevitable:

Let us now look at another example:

(1) Paris is in France, and (2) France is in Europe. So obviously (3) Paris is in Europe.

Here is the corresponding argument map:

Note that the two premises are connected together before linking to the conclusion. This merging of the links indicate that the two premises are co-premises which work together in a single argument to support the conclusion. In other words, they do not provide independent reasons for accepting the conclusion. Without one of the premises, the other premise would fail to support the conclusion.

This should be contrasted with the following example where the premises are not co-premises. They provide independent reasons for supporting the conclusion:

[1] Smoking is unhealthy, since [2] it can cause cancer. Furthermore, [3] it also increases the chance of heart attacks and strokes.

Instead of writing the premises and the conclusion in full in the argument map, we can label them and write down their numbers instead:

This diagram tells us that [2] and [3] are independent reasons supporting [1]. In other words, without [2], [3] would still support [1], and without [3], [2] would still support [1]. (Although the argument is stronger with both premises.)

Finally, it is also possible to have a single reason giving rise to multiple conclusions :

[1] Gold is a metal. [2] So it conducts electricity. [3] It also conducts heat.

§2. More complicated examples

Now that we know the basics of argument maps, we can combine the templates we learn above to represent more complicated arguments, by following this proceudre:

  1. Identify the most important or main conclusion(s) of the argument.
  2. Identify the premises used to support the conclusion(s). These are the premises of the main argument.
  3. If additional arguments have been given to support any of these premises, identify the premises of these additional arguments as well, and repeat this procedure.
  4. Label the premises and conclusions using numerals or letters.
  5. Write down the labels in a tree structure and draw arrows leading from sets of premises to the conclusions they support.

Let us try this out on this argument:

Po cannot come to the party because her scooter is broken. Dipsy also cannot come because he has to pick up his new hat. I did not invite the other teletubbies, so no teletubby will come up to the party.

We now label and refomulate the premises and the conclusions:

  1. Po cannot come to the party.
  2. Po's scooter is broken.
  3. Dipsy cannot come to the party.
  4. Dipsy has to pick up his new hat.
  5. I did not invite the other teletubbies.
  6. [Conclusion] No teletubby will come up to the party.

We can then draw the argument map like this:

This is an example of what we might call a multi-layered complex argument, where an intermediate conclusion is used as a premise in another argument. So [1] and [3] are the intermediate conclusions, which together with [5] lead to the main conclusion [6]. This complex argument is therefore made up of three overlapping simple arguments in total. Of course, in this particular case you can understand the argument perfectly well without using this diagram. But with more complicated arguments, a picture can be an indispensable aid.

Draw argument maps for the following arguments:

  1. [1] This computer can think. So [2] it is conscious. Since [3] we should not kill any conscious beings, [4] we should not switch it off.
  2. [1. Many people think that having a dark tan is attractive.] [2. But the fact is that too much exposure to the sun is very unhealthy.] [3. It has been shown that sunlight can cause premature aging of the skin.] [4. Ultraviolent rays in the sun might also trigger off skin cancer.]
  3. [1. If Lala is here, then Po should be here as well.] [2. It follows that if Po is not here, Lala is also absent,] and indeed [3. Po is not here.] So most likely [4. Lala is not around.]
  4. [1. Marriage is becoming unfashionable.] [2. Divorce rate is at an all time high], and [3. cohabitation is increasingly presented in a positive manner in the media]. [4. Movies are full of characters who live together and unwilling to commit to a lifelong partnership]. [5. Even newspaper columnists recommend people to live together for an extended period before marriage in order to test their compatibility.]
  5. [1. All university students should study critical thinking.] After all, [2. critical thinking is necessary for surviving in the new economy] as [3. we need to adapt to rapid changes, and make critical use of information in making decisions.] Also, [4. critical thinking can help us reflect on our values and purposes in life.] Finally, [5. critical thinking helps us improve our study skills.]

§3. More tutorials

If you are interested to learn more about drawing argument maps, you can visit the Australian company Austhink for a set of detailed online tutorials on argument mapping. An earlier version of these tutorials was commissioned by the University of Hong Kong:

§4. Software for drawing argument maps

  • Rationale - Commercial software for drawing argument maps and there is both an online and off-line (windows) version.
  • Argunet - Free argument map editor that runs on Java.
  • The Wikipedia page on argument mapping includes a list of argument mapping software.

previous tutorial next tutorial

Critical Reasoning 101: Argument Structure



Different components of an argument


The mayor of the city recently announced the construction of seventeen high-rise buildings in and around the area of Mira road, a northern suburb of Mumbai.The construction of these new buildings will create a large amount of pollution, a nuisance for residents who live near the construction sites.However, many of the residents in the neighborhood work in civil and mechanical construction, and the contract to construct the buildings has been tendered to a local construction company.So, the construction of the buildings will lead to an increased quality of life for the residents of Mira road.

Background, Conclusion, Premise, Conclusion

Premise: A premise is a piece of information used by the author to support a claim or a conclusion. The information can be either a fact or an opinion. In the above example, the sentence in red (sentence 3) is a premise because it helps to support the author’s conclusion. On the GMAT, all arguments will have at least one premise.
Conclusion: A conclusion is a claim that the author is trying to prove. This is easily the most important sentence in the argument. For example, the last sentence in green is an example of a conclusion.
Background Information: Some arguments contain sentences that provides context to let us know the basics of the situation. For example, sentence 1 in yellow provides context.
Counterpoint or Counterpremise: A piece of information that goes against the author’s conclusion. In the above example, sentence 2 represents a counterpoint because it goes against the author’s conclusion.

How to classify the argument into different structures:


Argument: The mayor of the city recently announced the construction of seventeen high-rise buildings in and around the area of Mira road, a northern suburb of Mumbai.
Thoughts: This is likely to be background information because it introduces a plan in form of an announcement. The argument is probably going to be about the announcement or the result of it.
Argument: The construction of these new buildings will create a large amount of pollution, a nuisance for residents who live near the construction sites.
Thoughts: This is in the “claim” area. This talks about something negative that will come out of the project. Why are they telling me this? I can’t figure out till I read further.
Argument: However, many of the residents in the neighborhood work in civil and mechanical construction, and the contract to construct the buildings has been tendered to a local construction company.
Thoughts: This starts with a contrast, signified by “however”. This goes against the contrast sentence above. Looks like one of these statements is a premise and the other a counterpoint.
Argument: So, the construction of the buildings will lead to an increased quality of life for the residents of Mira road.
Thoughts: This is definitely a conclusion, marked by “so”.

Not all arguments will have a conclusion. The premise and the conclusion form the core of an argument. In the above sentence the core is defined by

However, many of the residents in the neighborhood work in civil and mechanical construction, and the contract to construct the buildings has been tendered to a local construction company. → So, the construction of the buildings will lead to an increased quality of life for the residents of Mira road.

Building blocks of an argument.


Premise
• Part of the core of the argument; present in every argument
• Supports the authors conclusion
• Can be a fact or an opinion; can be a description, historical information, statistical or numerical data, or a comparison of things
• Often signaled by words or phrases such as because o f since, due to, and as a result of

Conclusion
• Part of the core of an argument; present in most arguments
• Represents the authors main opinion or claim; can be in the form of a prediction, a judgment of quality or merit, or a statement of causality
• Is supported by at least one premise
• Often signaled by words such as therefore, thus, so , and consequently (though note that harder arguments might use such a word elsewhere in the argument in an attempt to confuse us)

Background
• Not part of the core; often present, but not always
• Provides context to help understand the core
• Almost always fact-based; can be in almost any form: historical information, numerical or other data, descriptions of plans or ideas, definitions of words or concepts, and so on

Counterpoint
• Not part of the core; only present occasionally
• Opposes or goes against the authors conclusion in some way
• Introduces multiple opportunities for traps: believing that the conclusion is the opposite of what it is, mistakenly labeling a counterpoint the premise (and vice versa), and so on
• Often signaled by transition words such as however, yet, and but\ typically, the transition word will be found somewhere between the counter-premise and the conclusion (though the two sentences may not be right next to each other)

Follow up exercise:


Break down the following arguments into Premise, Conclusion, Background and Counter-point!
1. Budget Fitness will grow its membership base by 10% in the next six months. Budget Fitness has recently crafted a clever ad campaign that it plans to air on several local radio stations.

2. Last year, the Hudson Family Farm was not profitable. However, the farm will be profitable this year. The farm operators have planted cotton, rather than corn, in several fields. Because cotton prices are expected to rise dramatically this year, the farm can expect larger revenues from cotton sales than it previously earned from corn.

This is the first part of the Critical Reasoning 101 Series. One CR article every week. Watch this space next Monday for the next.


_________________

Have an MBA application Question?ASK ME ANYTHING!

My Stuff: Four Years to 760 | MBA Trends for Indian Applicants

My GMAT Resources
V30-V40: How to do it! | GMATPrep SC | GMATPrep CR | GMATPrep RC | Critical Reasoning Megathread | CR: Numbers and Statistics | CR: Weaken | CR: Strengthen | CR: Assumption | SC: Modifier | SC: Meaning | SC: SV Agreement | RC: Primary Purpose | PS/DS: Numbers and Inequalities | PS/DS: Combinatorics and Coordinates

My MBA Resources
Everything about the MBA Application | Over-Represented MBA woes | Fit Vs Rankings | Low GPA: What you can do | Letter of Recommendation: The Guide | Indian B Schools accepting GMAT score | Why MBA?

My Reviews
Veritas Prep Live Online

Categories: 1

0 Replies to “Structure Of An Argument Critical Thinking”

Leave a comment

L'indirizzo email non verrà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *