1. Clarification of meaning.
2. Identification of conclusion {stated and unstated}.
3. Portrayal of structure.
4. Formulation of unstated assumptions {missing premises}:
A) What he or she consciously assumed or would accept as an assumption if asked.
B) The minimal assumptions of the argument:
Whatever is logically necessary to make it possible to get
from the premises to the conclusion.
C) The optimal assumptions, usually stronger claims than B
which are logically adequate and independently well supported.
5. Criticism of
A) Inferences
B) Premises
Criticizing an inference from Statement 1 to Statement 2
means criticizing the claim that 1 supports 2.
You do not need to know whether 1 is true.
Criticizing a premise requires that,
if the argument is going to be any good as a way of marshaling support,
the premises must be reliable.
6. Introduction of other relevant arguments.
7. Overall evaluation of argument in light of 1 through 6.
Example: If you talk to the professional tea- tasters, you will find that they prefer Lipton's.
There is a clear implication here, even though it is not stated.
The implication is that Lipton's is the best tea, presumably in fact, the best tea for you.
From: Reasoning by Michael Scriven
| Last Updated: 10/19/22 |