Scribd
Upload
2 views

UnitLesson 4 Constructing Arguments-1

This document is an introduction to critical thinking, focusing on the construction and evaluation of arguments. It outlines the structure of arguments, types of arguments (deductive and inductive), and the concepts of validity and soundness. Additionally, it provides practical exercises for analyzing various sources to enhance critical thinking skills.

Uploaded by

nadiandilishange
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
2 views

UnitLesson 4 Constructing Arguments-1

This document is an introduction to critical thinking, focusing on the construction and evaluation of arguments. It outlines the structure of arguments, types of arguments (deductive and inductive), and the concepts of validity and soundness. Additionally, it provides practical exercises for analyzing various sources to enhance critical thinking skills.

Uploaded by

nadiandilishange
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 21

INTRODUCTION TO

CRITICAL THINKING

Unit 4: Construction of Arguments


January 2024 (Dr. J. Mukoroli) edited by K. du
Plessis (2025)
Unit Objectives

By the end of this unit, you should be able to:


1.Explain what is an argument
2.Evaluate an argument
3.Practice critical thinking arguments
4.Construct a compelling argument
5.Identify logical fallacies in arguments
2
Constructing an argument

1. Argument: a set of statements with a premise and


conclusion.

3
Structure of an argument
1. Contains a statement
2. Has at least one premise
3. Has a conclusion
Example:"Calculus II will be no harder than Calculus I. Susan
did well in Calculus I. So, Susan should do well in Calculus II.“

4
Putting an Argument in Standard Form

Standard Form: Helps to evaluate arguments clearly.


Steps:
• Write each premise on a separate, numbered line.
• Draw a line underneath the last premise and write the
conclusion underneath it.
Example:
• Premise 1:Calculus II will be no harder than Calculus I.
• Premise 2: Susan did well in Calculus I.
• Conclusion: Susan should do well in Calculus II.

5
Looking for Indicator Words
Indicator words help identify premises and conclusions:
• Conclusion indicators: Therefore, So, Thus, Hence, etc.
• Premise indicators: Since, Because, For, For the reason that,
etc.
Example:
• Conclusion indicator: Clear and concise communication is essential in
government settings, and employees with strong writing and speaking
skills are more likely to communicate effectively; therefore,
professional writing and speaking skills training is crucial for
government employees.
• Premise indicator: "Susan should do well in Calculus II, because
Calculus II will be no harder than Calculus I, and Susan did well in
Calculus I."

6
Example of an analysis of an argument

Sixty percent of grade 12 AS students failed


English (premise), because the English
teachers do not receive continuous training
regarding the curriculum (premise),
therefore more training should be provided
to the English teachers (conclusion)
7
Evaluation of arguments
Types of Arguments:
Deductive: Intended to establish the absolute truth of the
conclusion.
Inductive: Intended to establish the probable truth of the
conclusion.
Valid vs. Invalid:
Valid: Impossible for premises to be true and conclusion
false.
Invalid: Possible for premises to be true and conclusion
false.
8
Valid, invalid, and sound arguments
Valid Argument: If the premises were true, the conclusion would
necessarily be true.
Sound Argument: A valid argument with all true premises.
Example:
Premise 1: All government employees must adhere to professional
communication standards.
Premise 2: John is a government employee.
Conclusion: Therefore, John must adhere to professional
communication standards.
Argument = valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion
= logically sound because both premises are true: government
employees are indeed required to follow professional
communication standards, and John is a government employee.
9
Valid, invalid, and sound arguments

True and valid arguments:


• Condition: all premises are true, then the conclusion is also true
Example:
• Premise 1: All triangles have three sides.
• Premise 2: This shape is a triangle.
• Conclusion: Therefore, this shape has three sides.
False but valid arguments:
• The premises (one or both) are not true in reality, but the argument
structure is correct
Example:
•Premise 1: All dogs can fly.
•Premise 2: Bella is a dog.
•Conclusion: Therefore, Bella can fly.
10
Valid, invalid, and sound arguments

True and invalid argument:


Definition: An argument is invalid if the conclusion does not
necessarily follow from the premises, even if the premises
are true.
Explanation: A true but invalid argument occurs when the
premises are true, but the conclusion does not logically
follow from them. The argument may seem persuasive
because the premises are accurate, but the reasoning is
flawed.

11
Valid, invalid, and sound arguments
True and invalid argument: Example:
• Premise 1: Most people who smoke cigarettes are at higher risk of
developing cancer.
• Premise 2: John smokes cigarettes.
• Conclusion: Therefore, John is certain to develop cancer.

This is a true but invalid argument because:


• Premise 1 is true: smoking does increase the risk of cancer.
• Premise 2 is true: John smokes cigarettes.
• However, the conclusion is invalid. While smoking increases the risk of
cancer, it does not guarantee that someone will get cancer. Risk does
not equate to certainty.
• Thus, the reasoning is flawed, even though both premises are true.

12
Valid, invalid, and sound arguments
True and invalid argument example 2:
Premise 1: Many ancient cultures believed the Earth was flat.
Premise 2: Ancient cultures were often knowledgeable in science and
observation.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Earth must be flat.

Argument = true: ancient cultures believed the Earth was flat


true: they had valuable knowledge.
However, argument = invalid because the conclusion (Earth must be flat)
does not logically follow from the premises. The belief of ancient
cultures doesn’t prove that the Earth is flat, as modern scientific
evidence shows that Earth is round. The argument is flawed by assuming
that past beliefs necessarily reflect current scientific truths.

13
Valid, invalid, and sound arguments

False and invalid arguments:


Definition: A false and invalid argument is one where both
the premises are false, and the reasoning does not logically
support the conclusion. This type of argument is not only
untrue but also poorly constructed in terms of logic.

14
Valid, invalid, and sound arguments
False and invalid arguments:
Example:
Premise 1: Armyworms are not currently in Namibia.
Premise 2: Armyworms do not cause any crop damage.
Conclusion: Therefore, there will never be a threat to crops in Namibia
from armyworms.
This is a false and invalid argument because:
Premise 1 = false: Armyworms are present in Namibia + are affecting farms.
Premise 2 = false: Armyworms do cause significant damage to crops.
Conclusion is invalid because even if the premises were true, the argument would still
be illogical since both premises are incorrect. The armyworm infestation is a real
threat, and it is a fallacy to conclude that there will NEVER be an armyworm threat,
even if there is none at this stage. The argument doesn't follow sound reasoning or
accurate information.
This argument fails on both factual grounds (false premises) and logical grounds
(invalid reasoning).
15
Evaluating inductive arguments

Strength of an Inductive Argument:


Strong: The premises make the conclusion likely
true.
Weak: The premises fail to make the conclusion
likely true.
Inductive Strength is on a continuum.
More premises can make it stronger.

16
Evaluating arguments in practice

How to practice:
News Stories: Examine the credibility of facts and
whether they justify the claims made.
Social Media: Assess whether evidence shared
online supports the claims made.
Corporate Statements: Evaluate the validity of
claims made by corporations (e.g., oil company’s
climate change efforts).

17
Practice your critical thinking argument

1.Analyse news stories (see if you can identify the


statement, premise and conclusion of author)
2.Analyse social media content (as above)
3. Analyse corporate statement: MTC, Old Mutual,
UNAM, FNB (as above)

18
How to practice your critical
thinking argument -
1.Analyse news stories (see if
you can identify the statement,
premise and conclusion of
author)
2.Analyse social media content
3. Analyse corporate statement
MTC. Old Mutual, UNAM, FNB,
Student online activity-
students complete online
activity in UNIT 4 and upload
response on MOODLE student
chat forum.
Thank You!

21

You might also like