Reasoning and argument analysis

One of the hallmarks of much philosophic writing is that there is some attempt to give reasons in support of a thesis.  Even though this class does not presuppose any training in logic, the student may well begin to consider some ideas about how to examine reasoning. For several points in this list, I draw on Michael Scriven, Reasoning.

Philosophy involves asking questions, considering alternative perspectives, reasoning, and articulating our experience/understanding.  One of philosophy’s methods is analytic philosophy.  This tradition asks persistently, “What does this mean?”  “Why do you believe it?”  Analytic philosophy emphasizes precise formulation of a question, involvement with the best contemporary philosophy on a given topic, lucid organization of ideas, keen analysis, construction of persuasive arguments, and clear writing.

One commonly suggested sequence of questions to develop your response to reading is: Describe, Interpret, Evaluate. For example, What does the author say? What does the author mean by what s/he says? Is it true?

When considering a piece of reasoning, you may find leverage in asking the following questions.

1. What is my purposein working with this piece of text (or our purpose, insofar as the inquiry is a team project)?  If there are multiple purposes, which purpose is dominant?
2. What does the author’s purposeseem to be?
3. Are there any empiricalclaims or assumptions which can be confirmed or disconfirmed in daily experience or science?
4. Are there claims or assumptions–positive or negative–about religion or spiritual realities?
5. What words or phrasesconvey key concepts?  (Do not overlook articles, prepositions, verb forms, etc.)  Is there any term, phrase, or sentence that is ambiguous?  What interpretations are possible?  What interpretation is most plausible?  Or is it the case that more than one meaning is involved (whether or not the ambiguity is deliberate)?  Note that what one finds to be clear depends partly upon the categories one is accustomed to using.  Is there any problem with the concepts being used?
6. In the sentenceswhere key affirmations are made (assuming, for the moment, that they are not questions, exclamations, commands, or invocations) is the grammar clear?  Are the subject and predicate presented as possibly linked, actually linked, or necessarily linked?  Does a sentence express a necessary condition or a sufficient condition?  What other possible relationships might obtain between subject and predicate?  Do not overlook the interesting structures of paragraphs and groups of paragraphs.
7. Examine the arguments.  The term “argument,” as used in philosophy, does not connote an angry dispute between persons; it simply means that a conclusion is being proposed on the basis of one or more reasons or premises.  In reasoning it is common to use words called inference markers.  “Therefore” indicates a conclusion.  “Because” indicates a reason for a conclusion.  Other conclusion indicators include “thus” and “hence.”  Other reason indicators include “since,” and (in some uses) “for.”

Argument is not the only way to achieve a strategic sequence in writing.  Authors also use descriptions, accounts, and narratives.

8. Identify the conclusion(s), stated and unstated.  What is the text driving at?  What is the main point?  There may be several arguments in the text.  Having summarized the text as a whole, you may focus on just one line of argument.
9. Identify the reason(s) or premise(s)for each conclusion.  Are the premises true?
10. Identify any unstated assumptions.  Attribute to the author only those assumptions that you may reasonably expect him or her to be assuming (on the basis of the text).  These are not necessarily the same as the assumptions that are logically required in order for the argument to be valid.  Are the assumptions true?
11. Construct a diagramof the argument.
12. Do the premises and unstated assumptions, IF TRUE, constitute strong evidence for the conclusion?
13. Consider other arguments that are relevant but not mentioned in the argument you are examining.
14. Give the argument an overall evaluation.  It’s easy to pick flaws.  Were your criticisms significant or minor?  Could the author easily fix the argument and make it strong?
15. What can you doconstructively with your analysis?