Exercise on the Structure of Arguments
1. My neighbor should get rid of all the cars in his yard. People do not like living next door to such a mess. He never drives any of them. They all look old and beat up and leak oil all over the place. It is bad for the neighborhood, and it will decrease property values.
Is this an argument?
- Yes, this is an argument.
Structure of the argument:
- My neighbor should get rid of all the cars in his yard. 1
- People do not like living next door to such a mess. 2
- He never drives any of them. 3
- They all look old and beat up, 4
- and leak oil all over the place. 5
- It is bad for the neighborhood, 6
- and it will decrease property values. 7
Additional Premises?
- If the neighbor actually used the cars, it would be alright for him to keep them on his property. a
- Since he does not use the cars, then they should be sitting there. b
- Cars that leak oil are not good for the environment. c
- The environment should not be damaged by a car/cars that just sit and spill oil for no good reason. d
- The neighbor should not be allowed to have a bunch of cars in his yard that leak oil and harm the environment or that will decrease the value of other homes in there are. e
Sub argument:
- Claim 3 is supported by a and b
- Claim 5 is supported by c and d
- 4 & 6 do not have enough support to be considered evidence of why the neighbor should get rid of the cars in the yard.
Is this a good argument?
- Claim 7 would depend on what the neighborhood already looks like. If it's a really nice and well groomed area, then that would make sense that the cars in the yard would decrease the property value. If the area was across the street from a fast food restaurant and a gas station, that would not really decrease the property value much more. Since the argument is valid, and makes enough sense, it is a good argument.
I did find this exercise useful because sometimes it can confusing trying to figure out whether an argument is valid, strong, or good. By working out this exercise, I saw that there was a formula to figure out what the argument was. This way you can make connections easier and see what kind of argument it is. For me, concepts like these have very fine lines between the different types of arguments. It definitely helped to see a formula to figure it out.
You did a really good job on your detailed structural example of the argument. You mapped out this argument in detail, especially with utilizing your addition premises. It is true that his leaking oil is bad for the environment and that the cars shouldn’t be parked in the driveway if they aren’t used. In your sub arguments you did a good job in showing the evidence that supports the claim. For example, the evidence that when cars leak oil, they are bad for the environment. It was very easy for me to understand the concept because you broke it down completely and clearly showed every part of the argument. Good job!
ReplyDeleteI agree as well, you did a really good job in describing this exercise. You made it easy for me to follow and understand. At first I was having a hard time trying to connect all the arguments to connect to the conclusion but once I kept going back to the book and looking at other peoples examples, such as yours, I began to understand it more and putting them together in order to understand it more. The neighbor should get rid of his ugly cars because it is decreasing the value of houses around the neighborhood. So it is a good argument, it definitely connects to the conclusion. Good job on your post!
ReplyDelete