Course: Introduction to Logic Program: ADS (CS)

Chapter 2: Analyzing Arguments

In the world of logical reasoning, “Analyzing Arguments” is a vital skill. It helps people break
down, evaluate, and understand persuasive discussions. Arguments are a big part of how we
communicate, and being able to analyze them carefully is useful in many areas of life, including
academics and everyday choices.
Analyzing Arguments means looking closely at the structure and content of arguments to figure
out if they are strong, valid, and convincing. It involves spotting important parts like statements,
conclusions, and supporting evidence. This skill lets you tell the difference between good and weak
arguments, spot mistakes or biases, and form well-informed opinions about the quality of the
reasoning.
Example 1: “Studies have shown that regular exercise can improve overall health, increase
energy levels, and reduce the risk of diseases.”
1. Paraphrasing Arguments
2. Diagramming Arguments
3. Complex Argumentative Passages
4. Problems in Reasoning

1. Paraphrasing Arguments
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, great care must
be taken to ensure that the paraphrase put forward captures correctly and completely the argument
that was to be analyzed.
Arguments in everyday life are often very complex. Premises may be many and in upset order;
they may be formulated uneasily, 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.
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.
Paraphrasing arguments is a valuable skill in communication. It involves rephrasing someone
else’s statements or ideas while retaining the original meaning. By doing so, we can better
understand and engage with the content, and it also helps avoid plagiarism. When paraphrasing,
consider the following tips:
Understand the Original: First, thoroughly comprehend the original argument or text.
Identify the main points and supporting details.
 Course: Introduction to Logic Program: ADS (CS)

Use Synonyms and Different Sentence Structures: Replace words with synonyms and
restructure sentences. Be careful not to change the intended meaning.
Maintain the Tone and Style: Keep the same tone (formal, informal, etc.) and style
(academic, conversational, etc.) as the original.
Cite the Source: Even when paraphrasing, acknowledge the original source by providing
proper citations.
Example: The death penalty is a violation of human rights. It is cruel, inhuman and degrading
punishment that has no place in a civilized society.
According to Amnesty International human rights are violated by the death sentence. Punishment
this harsh, barbaric, and dehumanizing has no place in a civilized society.
2. Diagramming Arguments
Diagramming arguments is a technique for analyzing the structure and logic of arguments. It
involves identifying the premises and the conclusion of an argument, and showing how they are
related to each other using symbols and diagrams. Diagramming arguments can help you
understand, evaluate, and construct arguments more effectively.
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: Smoking causes neck cancer. Lung cancer is a serious disease. Therefore, smoking is
bad for your health. Diagram:

Therefore, smoking
Smoking causes Neck cancer is a
is bad for your
neck cancer serious disease.
health
 Course: Introduction to Logic Program: ADS (CS)

3. Complex Argumentative Passages

Analyzing arguments from complex argumentative passages is a skill that can help you
understand, evaluate, and construct arguments more effectively. It involves identifying the
premises and the conclusion of an argument, and showing how they are related to each other
using symbols and diagrams. It also involves assessing the strength and validity of an argument,
and responding to it with your own point of view. These are the ways of analyzing arguments
from a passage:
I. Read the passage carefully and identify the main claim or conclusion that the author is
trying to persuade you of. Look for conclusion indicators, such as “therefore”, “thus”,
“hence”, “so”, etc.
II. Identify the reasons or premises that the author provides to support the conclusion. Look
for premise indicators, such as “because”, “since”, “for”, “as”, etc.
III. Diagram the argument by using symbols and diagrams to show the structure and logic of
the argument. For example, you can use numbers and arrows to show which premises
support which conclusion, and use plus signs (+) and lines to show which premises are
dependent on each other. You can also use brackets or circles to show sub-arguments
within the main argument.
IV. Evaluate the argument by checking the truth and relevance of the premises, and the
validity and soundness of the argument. A valid argument is one where the conclusion
follows logically from the premises, and a sound argument is one where the premises are
true and the argument is valid. You can also look for any logical fallacies or errors in
reasoning that might weaken the argument.
V. Respond to the argument by stating your own position on the issue, and providing your
own reasons and evidence to support it. You can also acknowledge any counter-
arguments or objections that might challenge your position, and explain why they are not
convincing or sufficient.
4. Problems in Reasoning
Analyzing arguments from problems in reasoning is a way of evaluating the quality and validity
of arguments that have some flaws or mistakes in their logic, evidence, or assumptions. Some of
the problems in reasoning that can affect arguments are bias, fallacies, poor research, and lack of
clarity.
Bias: This is a tendency to favor or oppose a certain person, group, idea, or thing, without
considering the evidence or the arguments objectively. Bias can lead to errors in reasoning, such
as ignoring or dismissing relevant information, cherry-picking data, or using emotional appeals
instead of logical support.
Fallacies: These are flaws or mistakes in reasoning that make an argument invalid or
unsound. Fallacies can be intentional or unintentional, and they can involve faulty logic,
irrelevant evidence, or false assumptions. Some common types of fallacies are: ad hominem,
 Course: Introduction to Logic Program: ADS (CS)

straw man, slippery slope, false dilemma, hasty generalization, circular reasoning, and post hoc
ergo propter hoc.
Poor research: This is a problem in reasoning that occurs when the evidence or the
sources used to support an argument are unreliable, outdated, incomplete, or inaccurate. Poor
research can undermine the credibility and the strength of an argument, and it can also mislead or
confuse the audience. To avoid poor research, one should use reputable and authoritative sources,
check the facts and the data, and cite the sources properly.
Lack of clarity: This is a problem in reasoning that happens when the argument is vague,
ambiguous, or poorly structured. Lack of clarity can make it difficult to understand the main point
and the supporting premises of an argument, and it can also create confusion or misunderstanding
among the audience. To improve clarity, one should use clear and precise language, define the key
terms, and organize the argument logically.
To analyze arguments from problems in reasoning, you need to identify the parts of the
argument, such as the claim, the premises, and the conclusion, and examine how they are related
and supported. You also need to spot any errors or weaknesses in the argument, such as invalid or
unsound reasoning, irrelevant or unreliable evidence, or false or questionable assumptions. You
can use some tools and techniques to help you analyze arguments from problems in reasoning,
such as:
Diagramming arguments: This is a method of visually representing the structure and
content of an argument, using symbols and lines to show the main claim, the supporting
premises, and the conclusion. Diagramming arguments can help you see the logical flow and the
connections between the parts of the argument, and also identify any gaps or inconsistencies in
the reasoning.
Identifying premise and conclusion indicators: These are words or phrases that signal
the presence of a premise or a conclusion in an argument, such as “because”, “since”,
“therefore”, “hence”, “thus”, etc. Identifying premise and conclusion indicators can help you
locate the parts of the argument and understand how they are related.
Recognizing common fallacies: These are errors or mistakes in reasoning that make an
argument invalid or unsound, such as appealing to emotions, attacking the person, using false
dilemmas, making hasty generalizations, etc. Recognizing common fallacies can help you spot
the flaws and weaknesses in an argument, and also avoid making them yourself.
Evaluating evidence and sources: This is a process of checking the quality and reliability
of the evidence and the sources used to support an argument, such as facts, statistics, studies,
experts, etc. Evaluating evidence and sources can help you determine the relevance and credibility
of the information, and also find any biases or inaccuracies.