How To Put An Argument In Standard Form

24 What Is Standard Argument Course?

Kirsten DeVries

A standard way of capturing the structure of an argument, or diagramming it, is by numbering the premises and conclusion.  For instance, the following represents another way to arrange the littering argument:

1. Littering is harmful
2. Litter is dangerous to animals
3. Litter is unsafe to humans

This numbered list represents an argument that has been put intostandard argument form.  A more precise definition of an argument now emerges, employing the vocabulary that is specific to bookish and rhetorical arguments. An statement is a gear up ofstatements, some of which (thepremises: statements two and 3 in a higher place) attempt to provide a reason for thinking that some other statement (theconclusion: statement 1) is true.

Tip

Diagramming an statement tin can be helpful when trying to figure out your essay'southward thesis.  Because a thesis is an argument, putting the parts of an argument into standard form tin assist sort ideas.  You can transform the numbered ideas into a cohesive judgement or two for your thesis once you are more than certain what your statement parts are.

Figure three.2 "Argument Diagram"

Recognizing arguments is essential to analysis and critical thinking; if yous cannot distinguish between the details (the support) of a piece of writing and what those details are there to support (the argument), yous will likely misunderstand what you are reading.  Additionally, studying how others make arguments can assist you acquire how to effectively create your own.

What Are Argument Indicators?

While mapping an argument in standard argument form can be a good way to figure out and formulate a thesis, identifying arguments by other writers is also of import.  The all-time way to place an statement is to enquire whether a claim exists (in statement class) that a writer justifies by reasons (also in statement class). Other identifying markers of arguments are primal words or phrases that are premise indicators or decision indicators. For instance, recall the littering argument, reworded here into a single sentence (much similar a thesis statement):

Littering is harmfulbecauseit is dangerous to both animals and humans.

The word "because" hither is apremise indicator. That is, "considering" indicates that what follows is a reason for thinking that littering is bad. Hither is another example:

The pupil plagiarizedsinceI institute the exact same sentences on a website, and the website was published more than a year before the student wrote the newspaper.

In this instance, the word "since" is a premise indicator because what follows is a statement that is clearly intended to be a reason for thinking that the student plagiarized (i.eastward., a premise). Notice that in these two cases, the premise indicators "because" and "since" are interchangeable: "because" could be used in place of "since" or "since" in the identify of "because," and the meaning of the sentences would accept been the same.

Effigy 3.3 "Mutual Premise Indicators"

In add-on to premise indicators, in that location are alsoconclusion indicators. Conclusion indicators marker that what follows is the conclusion of an argument. For instance,

Bob-the-arsonist has been dead for a year,soBob-the-arsonist didn't fix the fire at the East Lansing Starbucks last week.

In this case, the discussion "and so" is a conclusion indicator because what follows it is a statement that someone is trying to establish as true (i.east., a conclusion). Here is some other example of a conclusion indicator:

A poll administered by Gallup (a respected polling company) showed candidate Ten to be essentially behind candidate Y with only a week left before the vote;therefore, candidate Y will probably non win the election.

In this example, the word "therefore" is a decision indicator because what follows information technology is a statement that someone is trying to establish equally true (i.east., a decision). Every bit earlier, in both of these cases, the decision indicators "so" and "therefore" are interchangeable: "So" could be used in place of "therefore" or "therefore" in the identify of "then," and the meaning of the sentences would have been the same.

Figure 3.four "Common Conclusion Indicators"

Exercise 2

Which of the following are arguments?  If it is an argument, identify the decision (claim) of the argument. If information technology is not an argument, explicate why not.  Remember to wait for the qualifying features of an statement: (1) It is a statement or series of statements, (2) information technology states a claim (a decision), and (three) it has at to the lowest degree i premise (reason for the claim).

1. The adult female with the hat is not a witch since witches have long noses, and she doesn't have a long olfactory organ.
2. I have been wrangling cattle since earlier you were old enough to tie your own shoes.
3. Albert is angry with me, and so he probably won't exist willing to assist me wash the dishes.
4. First, I done the dishes, and then I dried them.
5. If the road weren't icy, the car wouldn't have slid off the turn.
6. Marvin isn't a firewoman and isn't a fisherman, either.
7. Are you lot seeing the rhino over there? Information technology'south huge!
8. Obesity has become a problem in the US because obesity rates take risen over the past four decades.
9. Bob showed me a graph with rising obesity rates, and I was very surprised to see how much they had risen.
10. Marvin isn't a fireman because Marvin is a Greyhound, which is a blazon of domestic dog, and dogs tin't be firemen.
11. What Susie told you is not the actual reason she missed her flight to Denver.
12. Carol likely forgot to lock her door this morning because she was distracted by a clown riding a unicycle while singing Lynyrd Skynyrd's "Unproblematic Human being."
13. No i who has ever gotten frostbite while climbing K2 has survived to tell almost it; therefore, no 1 e'er will.

What Constitutes Support?

To ensure that your statement is sound—that the premises for your conclusion are true—you lot must foundsupport.  The brunt of proof, to infringe language from law, is on the i making an argument, not on the recipient of an argument.  If y'all wish to assert a merits, you must and then besides back up it, and this support must be relevant, logical, and sufficient.

It is of import to use the right kind of show, to apply information technology effectively, and to accept an advisable amount of it.

• If, for instance, your philosophy professor did not like that you used a survey of public stance every bit your primary evidence in an ethics paper, you nigh probable used textile that was notrelevant to your topic.  Rather, you should find out what philosophers count as practiced show. Dissimilar fields of study involve types of evidence based on relevance to those fields.

• If your professor has put question marks by your thesis or has written, "It does not follow," you likely have issues with logic.  Make sure it is clear how the parts of your statement logically fit together.

• If your instructor has told y'all that yous need more than analysis, suggested that you are "just listing" points or giving a "laundry list," yous likely have non included enough explanation for how a point connects to and supports your argument, which is some other trouble withlogic, this time related to thewarrants of your argument. Yous need to fully incorporate evidence into your argument. (See more on warrants immediately below.)

• If yous see comments like "for instance?," "proof?," "go deeper," or "expand," you may demand more than show.  In other words, the evidence you have is not yetsufficient.  One or 2 pieces of testify will not be enough to testify your argument.  Similarly, multiple pieces of testify that aren't developed thoroughly would too be flawed, besides insufficient. Would a lawyer go to trial with simply one piece of bear witness?  No, the lawyer would want to have every bit much evidence as possible from a variety of sources to make a viable case.  Similarly, a lawyer would fully develop evidence for a claim using explanation, facts, statistics, stories, experiences, research, details, and the like.

You lot volition detect more data about the different types of testify, how to find them, and what makes them credible inChapter half-dozen, "Research."Logic volition be covered later on in this chapter.

What Is the Warrant?

In a higher place all, connect the evidence to the statement.  This connection is thewarrant.  Evidence is not self-evident.  In other words, after introducing prove into your writing, you lot must demonstrate why and how this evidence supports your statement. Y'all must explain the significance of the evidence and its part in your paper. What turns a fact or slice of data into evidence is the connexion information technology has with a larger claim or statement: Show is ever evidencefor oragainst something, and you have to brand that link clear.

Tip

Student writers sometimes assume that readers already know the data being written about; students may be wary of elaborating besides much because they call up their points are obvious. But remember, readers are not mind readers: Although they may be familiar with many of the ideas discussed, they don't know what writers want to do with those ideas unless they point that through explanations, organization, and transitions. Thus, when you write, exist sure to explain the connections y'all made in your mind when you chose your evidence, decided where to place information technology in your newspaper, and drew conclusions based on it.

What Is a Counterargument?

Recall that arguments are multi-sided. As you brainstorm and prepare to present your idea and your support for it, consider other sides of the result. These other sides are counterarguments. Make a list of counterarguments as you work through the writing process, and use them to build your case – to widen your idea to include a valid counterargument, to explain how a counterargument might be defeated, to illustrate how a counterargument may not withstand the scrutiny your research has uncovered, and/or to show that yous are aware of and accept taken into account other possibilities.

For example, you lot might choose the issue of declawing cats and set up your search with the question should I have my indoor cat declawed? Your research, interviews, surveys, personal experiences might yield several angles on this question: Yeah, it will save your furniture and your arms and ankles. No, it causes psychological bug for the cat. No, if the cat should get outside, he volition exist without defence. As a writer, be prepared to address alternate arguments and to include them to the extent that information technology will illustrate your reasoning.

Almost anything claimed in a paper can be refuted or challenged. Opposing points of view and arguments exist in every contend. It is smart to anticipate possible objections to your arguments – and to do so will make your arguments stronger. Some other term for a counterargument isantithesis (i.east., the opposition to a thesis). To discover possible counterarguments (and keep in heed there tin be many counterpoints to one claim), inquire the following questions:

• Could someone describe a different conclusion from the facts or examples yous nowadays?
• Could a reader question whatever of your assumptions or claims?
• Could a reader offer a different explanation of an upshot?
• Is in that location any evidence out in that location that could weaken your position?

If the answer to any of these questions is yes, the next prepare of questions can aid you lot reply to these potential objections:

Is it possible to concede the point of the opposition, but and then challenge that point's importance/usefulness?

• Tin you offer an explanation of why a reader should question a piece of show or consider a different bespeak of view?
• Tin you explain how your position responds to any contradicting evidence?
• Can you put forward a unlike estimation of evidence?

It may non seem likely at get-go, but clearly recognizing and addressing dissimilar sides of the argument, the ones that are not your ain, can make your argument and paper stronger. By addressing the antonym of your statement essay, you are showing your readers that you take advisedly considered the issue and accept that there are often other ways to view the same thing.

You can use signal phrases in your paper to warning readers that yous are about to nowadays an objection. Consider using ane of these phrases–or ones like them–at the get-go of a paragraph:

• Researchers accept challenged these claims with…
• Critics fence that this view…
• Some readers may point to…

What Are More Complex Argument Structures?

Then far you have seen that an argument consists of a decision and a premise (typically more than one). However, often arguments and explanations take a more complex structure than but a few premises that straight back up the conclusion. For case, consider the following argument:

No i living in Pompeii could have survived the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius. The reason is unproblematic: The lava was flowing too fast, and there was nowhere to become to escape information technology in time. Therefore, this business relationship of the eruption, which claims to take been written past an eyewitness living in Pompeii, was non actually written by an bystander.

Themain conclusion of this statement—the argument that depends on other statements as evidence but doesn't itself provide any testify for other statements—is

A. This account of the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius was non actually written past an bystander.

Notwithstanding, the statement's structure is more than complex than merely having a couple of premises that provide evidence direct for the conclusion. Rather, some statements provide evidence straight for the main conclusion, only some premise statements support other premise statements which then support the conclusion.

To determine the structure of an statement, yous must determine which statements support which, using premise and conclusion indicators to assist. For example, the passage to a higher place contains the phrase, "the reason is…" which is a premise indicator, and it as well contains the conclusion indicator, "therefore." That determination indicator helps identify the chief conclusion, only the more important element to run across is that statement A does non itself provide evidence or support for any of the other statements in the argument, which is the clearest reason statement A is the main determination of the statement. The next questions to answer are these: Which statement nigh straight supports A? What most directly supports A is

B. No one living in Pompeii could have survived the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius.

However, in that location is also a reason offered in support of B. That reason is the post-obit:

C. The lava from Mt. Vesuvius was flowing too fast, and at that place was nowhere for someone living in Pompeii to go to escape it in time.

So the principal conclusion (A) is directly supported by B, and B is supported past C.  Since B acts every bit a premise for the main conclusion just is also itself the conclusion of further premises, B is classified as anintermediate conclusion. What you should recognize here is thatone and the same statement can act every bit both a premise and a conclusion. Statement B is a premise that supports the main conclusion (A), but it is also itself a determination that follows from C. Here is how to put this circuitous statement into standard class (using numbers this time, as is typical for diagramming arguments):

1. The lava from Mt. Vesuvius was flowing likewise fast, and there was nowhere for someone living in Pompeii to go to escape information technology in time.
2. Therefore, no 1 living in Pompeii could have survived the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius. (from 1)
3. Therefore, this account of the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius was not actually written by an eyewitness. (from ii)

Discover that at the end of statement ii is a written indicator in parentheses (from ane), and, too, at the cease of statement iii is some other indicator (from 2). From one is a autograph way of maxim, "this argument follows logically from statement 1." Use this convention as a way to keep track of an statement'due south structure. It may also aid to retrieve about the structure of an argument spatially, equally the figure below shows:

Figure 3.v fromIntroduction to Logic and Critical Thinking by Matthew Van Carve

The main argument here (from 2 to iii) contains asubargument, in this case, the argument from ane (a premise) to 2 (the intermediate decision). A subargument, equally the term suggests, is a role of an argument that provides indirect back up for the primary argument. The main argument is only the argument whose conclusion is the main determination.

Another type of construction that arguments tin have is when two or more premises provide directly but independent support for the conclusion. Here is an example of an argument with that structure:

Wanda rode her cycle to work today because when she arrived at piece of work she had her right pant leg rolled up, which cyclists do to proceed their pants legs from getting caught in the chain. Moreover, our co-worker, Bob, who works in accounting, saw her riding towards work at 7:45 a.grand.

The decision of this argument is "Wanda rode her wheel to work today"; two premises provide contained support for it: the fact that Wanda had her pant leg cuffed and the fact that Bob saw her riding her cycle. Here is the statement in standard form:

1. Wanda arrived at piece of work with her right pant leg rolled up.
2. Cyclists often gyre upward their right pant leg.
3. Bob saw Wanda riding her wheel towards work at 7:45.
4. Therefore, Wanda rode her bike to work today. (from i-2, iii independently)

Again, notice that next to statement 4 of the argument is an indicator of how each office of the argument relates to the main conclusion. In this case, to avoid any ambiguity, yous tin can see that the support for the conclusion comes independently from statements 1 and 2, on the one hand, and from statement 3, on the other manus. It is of import to point out that an argumentor subargument can be supported by one or more than premises, the case in this argument because the primary conclusion (4) is supported jointly by 1 and ii, and singly by three. As before, we can represent the structure of this argument spatially, as the figure below shows:

Figure 3.6 from Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking by Matthew Van Cleave

There are endless argument structures that can be generated from a few uncomplicated patterns. At this indicate, it is of import to understand that arguments tin take different structures and that some arguments volition be more complex than others. Determining the structure of complex arguments is a skill that takes some time to master, rather like simplifying equations in math. Even so, it may aid to recollect that any statement structure ultimately traces back to some combination of bounds, intermediate arguments, and a master conclusion.

Exercise 3

Write the following arguments in standard form.  If whatever arguments are complex, show how each complex statement is structured using a diagram like those shown simply above.

1. There is nix wrong with prostitution because there is nix wrong with consensual sexual and economic interactions between adults. Moreover, there is no difference between a man who goes on a blind date with a woman, buys her dinner so has sexual activity with her and a human being who but pays a adult female for sex, which is some other reason at that place is nothing wrong with prostitution.

2. Prostitution is wrong because it involves women who have typically been sexually driveling as children. Proof that these women have been abused comes from multiple surveys done with female prostitutes that show a high percent of cocky-reported sexual abuse as children.

3. Someone was in this motel recently because warm water was in the tea kettle and wood was still smoldering in the fireplace. However, the person couldn't have been Tim considering Tim has been with me the whole fourth dimension. Therefore, someone else must be in these woods.

4. Someone tin be blind and yet run in the Olympic Games since Marla Runyan did it at the 2000 Sydney Olympics.

5. The train was tardily because it had to take a longer, alternating route seeing as the span was out.

6. Israel is not safe if Islamic republic of iran gets nuclear missiles because Islamic republic of iran has threatened multiple times to destroy State of israel, and if Islamic republic of iran had nuclear missiles, it would be able to carry out this threat. Furthermore, since Iran has been developing enriched uranium, it has the key component needed for nuclear weapons; every other part of the procedure of building a nuclear weapon is simple compared to that. Therefore, State of israel is not safe.

7. Since all professional hockey players are missing front teeth, and Martin is a professional hockey role player, it follows that Martin is missing front teeth. Because almost all professional person athletes who are missing their front teeth have false teeth, it follows that Martin probably has simulated teeth.

viii. Anyone who eats the crab rangoon at Prc Food restaurant will probably have stomach troubles afterward. It has happened to me every time; thus, it will probably happen to other people also. Since Bob ate the crab rangoon at China Nutrient restaurant, he will probably take stomach troubles afterward.

9. Lucky and Caroline like to go for runs in the afternoon in Hyde Park.  Considering Lucky never runs solitary, whatever fourth dimension Albert is running, Caroline must as well be running. Albert looks like he has just run (since he is panting difficult), so it follows that Caroline must have run, besides.

10. Merely considering Linda'due south prints were on the gun that killed Terry and the gun was registered to Linda, it doesn't mean that Linda killed Terry since Linda's prints would certainly be on her own gun, and someone else could have stolen her gun and used it to impale Terry.

Key Takeaways: Components of Vocabulary and Statement

• Decision—a claim that is asserted as truthful.  One part of an statement.
• Premise—a reason behind a conclusion.  The other part of an statement.  Most conclusions accept more than than 1 premise.
• Statement—a declarative sentence that can be evaluated as true or fake.  The parts of an argument, premises and the determination, should be statements.
• Standard Argument Form—a numbered breakdown of the parts of an argument (conclusion and all premises).
• Premise Indicators—terms that signal that a premise, or reason, is coming.
• Determination Indicator—terms that signal that a conclusion, or merits, is coming.
• Support—annihilation used as proof or reasoning for an argument.  This includes prove, experience, and logic.
• Warrant—the connexion made betwixt the support and the reasons of an argument.
• Counterargument—an opposing statement to the one yous make.  An argument can have multiple counterarguments.
• Circuitous Arguments–these are formed by more than individual bounds that point to a conclusion.  Complex arguments may take layers to them, including an intermediate statement that may act every bit both a conclusion (with its own premises) and a premise (for the main conclusion).

Source: https://viva.pressbooks.pub/letsgetwriting/chapter/what-is-standard-argument-form/

Share this post