Preface
Updated for a posting on academia.edu, 20240309. This was the first review of the Pirie text.
Photo was of recent books purchased. The Kant book was a PhD reference.
---
Philosopher Madsen Pirie explains that 'sound reasoning is the basis of winning at argument. Logical fallacies undermine arguments'. Pirie (2006)(2015: xii). He writes that any trick of logic or language which allows a statement or claim to be passed off as something it is not, actually, has the 'admission' card to the enclosure known as fallacies. (xii).
In describing 1. What is an argument
It is stated that an argument begins with a disagreement. (1). A first person puts forward a point or view or opinion and this is contrasted by a point, view or opinion differing.These views are not compatible, in other words the two views cannot simultaneously be held to.
An argument supports one side and position and undermines the other side and position. (1).
This is a loose term for an argument, states the author, when people assert opposing positions; the term argument is more correctly applied with supporting material. (2).
Point, view and opinion could also be called a premise (s) leading to a conclusion, notably from my MPhil and PhD questionnaire work.
Philosopher Madsen Pirie explains that 'sound reasoning is the basis of winning at argument. Logical fallacies undermine arguments'. Pirie (2006)(2015: xii). He writes that any trick of logic or language which allows a statement or claim to be passed off as something it is not, actually, has the 'admission' card to the enclosure known as fallacies. (xii).
In describing 1. What is an argument
It is stated that an argument begins with a disagreement. (1). A first person puts forward a point or view or opinion and this is contrasted by a point, view or opinion differing.These views are not compatible, in other words the two views cannot simultaneously be held to.
An argument supports one side and position and undermines the other side and position. (1).
This is a loose term for an argument, states the author, when people assert opposing positions; the term argument is more correctly applied with supporting material. (2).
Point, view and opinion could also be called a premise (s) leading to a conclusion, notably from my MPhil and PhD questionnaire work.
(A proposition/statement would be a singular point/claim. Not technically an argument)
The Elements texts states that an argument is a set of claims, one of which is supported by the others.
A claim or a set of claims support a claim. Elements (1997: 5).
The conclusion is supported by the premise (s). My add.
A conclusion is a claim meant to be supported by the claims or reasons provided in the argument.
A premise is a claim put forward to support a conclusion. (5).
Elements states
The Elements texts states that an argument is a set of claims, one of which is supported by the others.
A claim or a set of claims support a claim. Elements (1997: 5).
The conclusion is supported by the premise (s). My add.
A conclusion is a claim meant to be supported by the claims or reasons provided in the argument.
A premise is a claim put forward to support a conclusion. (5).
Elements states
Argument=conclusion+premises, (5)
Or again from my United Kingdom theses work, it could be stated
Argument=premise (s)+conclusion
One infers or makes an inference each time a conclusion is drawn from a premise or premises. (6).
An argument can fail if it has a false premise (s) or has premise (s) that is irrelevant or provide inadequate support for a conclusion. (7). But the authors point out that a bad argument is still an argument. (7).
In other words a bad argument is not sound or true.
Or again from my United Kingdom theses work, it could be stated
Argument=premise (s)+conclusion
One infers or makes an inference each time a conclusion is drawn from a premise or premises. (6).
An argument can fail if it has a false premise (s) or has premise (s) that is irrelevant or provide inadequate support for a conclusion. (7). But the authors point out that a bad argument is still an argument. (7).
In other words a bad argument is not sound or true.
Further from Pirie: A valid argument can have a false premise. (69). As long as the premise (s) are not true and the conclusion false, it is logically possible to have a valid argument. Premise-Conclusion TT, FF, FT, TF combinations. A true premise (s) and false conclusion (TF) from these combinations, cannot possibly be logically valid. The other combinations are logically valid. However, as Pire recognizes, a sound (true) argument has all true premises. (69). I am not placing a limit on the number of premises within every type of argument. The conclusion would also be true.
CONWAY DAVID A. AND RONALD MUNSON (1997) The Elements of Reasoning, Wadsworth Publishing Company, New York.
CONWAY DAVID A. AND RONALD MUNSON (1997) The Elements of Reasoning, Wadsworth Publishing Company, New York.
LANGER, SUSANNE K (1953)(1967) An Introduction to Symbolic Logic, Dover Publications, New York. (Philosophy).
PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.
PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1977)(2002) God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1977)(2002) God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1982) The Nature of Necessity, Oxford, Clarendon Press.
PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (2000) Warranted Christian Belief, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
 |
| VR Zone/Facebook |
