PHIL 201STUDY GUIDE: LESSON 6Analyzing ArgumentsLesson OverviewIn our final lesson on logic and arguing we discuss the task of constructing and analyzing an argument. Throughout the rest of this course, you will be introduced to a variety of philosophicaltheories that attempt to answer some puzzling philosophical questions. These theories will argue for a particular way to answer the questions and you will want to be able to evaluate those arguments to see if you agree with them or not. This lesson will give you a tactical approach in how to perform the task of analyzing and evaluating arguments. I divide the lesson into 2 parts: how to construct an argument of your own and how to evaluate other arguments.TasksView and take notes of the presentation, “Analyzing Arguments.” It nicely summarizes a numberof points in the reading.Read and take notes from Prelude to Philosophy, Chapter 7: “Analyzing Arguments.” As you read, make sure you understand the following points and questions:Why is clarity important for a good argument? Being clear of what you are defending, the structure of your reasoning and how the premises lead to the conclusion need to be clearly communicated. Must useappropriate language and define any terms that need clarification. Avoid using clichés, ambiguity and vagueness. (pg. 173)What is the difference between consistent and coherent? Consistent- within a set of beliefs none of them contradict one anotherCoherent - the beliefs relate together in a way that is mutually supportive.A good argument is more than a bunch of consistent beliefs. In good arguments, beliefs need to be related together, and that is the task of coherence. (pg. 174)What determines how comprehensive an argument needs to be? Good arguments consider all know reasonable alternatives and arguments for a view and can account for them as part of the overall argument. Not every alternative needs to be presented. THE CONTEXT WILL OFTEN DETERMINE HOW MUCH NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT UP. (pg. 174)What are the 2 basic approaches to structuring an argument? 1. State the conclusion first followed by the premises2. State the premises and then follow with a "therefore" type of conclusion.(pg. 175)Explain the idea of fair use of evidence. Good arguments use evidence fairly and avoid suppressing evidence in favor of a particular position. Do not have the option of being selective toward evidence considered. Philosophy does not allow you to ignore or suppress evidence in hopes that it will disappear.(pgs 175-176)Page 1 of 4PHIL 201What is a positive/negative approach and what is the advantage of using it? Strong approach. Present the positive evidence in favor of the view supported and also provide negative evidence toward the view opposed. This can be direct evidence against that view or int he form of problems with the evidence thatview employs. Offering a superior view. If you can show that not only does your view have good evidence, but that the other view is weak, then your argument is much stronger. (pg. 176)What is the advantage of a best explanation approach? A best explanation will not only explain the particular question under consideration but also will address a host of related questions and issues. The goal is not be find the perfect solution but to arrive at one that offers the best explanation with the least number of problems. (pg. 176-178)List and explain the 5 aspects of a best explanation. 1. Explanatory scope2. Explanatory power3. Plausibility4. Minimally ad hoc5. Illumination(pg. 177)What is the principle of simplicity and what is a danger concerning it? Arguments t hat do not contain unnecessary assumptions and reasoning. Also called parsimony. Occam's Razor. Keeping ideas simple.Danger: You need to be careful in how you wield Occam's razor. Some issues are often more complex than we initially give them credit for. Strive to not become too simplistic. (pg. 178)What is the very first task in analyzing an argument?Step 1: Distinguish the premises from the conclusion (pg. 179)What are 3 ways to find the conclusion in an argument?1. Look for indicator terms (pg. 179-180)2. Most of the time the conclusion is either the 1st or last sentence in the argument (pg. 180)3. Ask “what is the main point of this argument?” (pg. 180)What is the common standard logical order for an argument? Write it out in a form in which the reasoningis apparent. Separate the premises from the conclusion to be able to examine each part of the argument. (pg. 180)Why do we ask about the premises supporting the conclusion before asking about the truthfulness of the premises?1. We are trying to determine whether we have a good argument or not (one where the conclusion follows from the premises)2. We can now answer this question without doing any extra burdensome work.(pg. 181)What are the 2 reasons arguments fail?1. The conclusion does not follow from the premises2. Premises themselves are not true(pg. 182)Page 2 of 4PHIL 201How does observing language help us to determine the reliability of the premises? To ensure that the claims made are accurate, precise and clear, not being manipulated into affirming or rejecting ideas by the language in which they are presented. (pg. 183)What is meant by examples being representative? When arguing, using examples as evidence to support your conclusion. (pg. 184)What is a counterexample?An example that refutes the ones that have been suggested in support of the conclusion. Counterexamples have the function of weakening an argument by showing that the conclusion does not necessarily follow. (pg. 185)Explain the problems of unqualified and conflicting authorities an how to resolve them.1. The authority being quoted is a bona fide and informed authority on the issue under consideration.2. Problem of conflicting authorities. Even authorities can disagree with one another.3. Merely claiming an expert does not necessarily settle an issue.(pg. 186)What are some of the traps to watch out for when arguing causally?1. Might be more complicated than initially appear.2. Should offer some elements to show how one event caused another event to occur.3. Care needs to be taken to not oversimplify a cause. Social events are often the result of multifaceted causes intricately connected together.4. When there are more than one cause, we are not able to test them.5. Must be able to show that 2 events are in fact causally connected. (pgs 187-188)Page 3 of 4PHIL 201TermsMake sure you fully understand