Go back to exercise 6.3 and review what you have done. You will need some further premises to show why the ones you have given are relevant to the four conclusions. Add a premise in each case.

Another example of using an additional claim to show the relevance of one claim to another concerns the use of authority to give a good foundation for claims. In the previous chapter, we saw how a claim can be well founded if it is supported by reference to a relevant authority. Obviously, then, effective reasoning will depend on our judgments of the relevance of various authorities to the claims that we wish to make. But, as before, we must be prepared to demonstrate this relevance. The following is an example we have already considered, but it has been expanded so that our reasoning is transparent:

1. Australian history is marked by considerable conflict and tension over the competing interests of labour and capital.

2. Rickard, Australia: A Cultural History (1992) asserts claim 1.

3. Rickard is a relevant authority on such matters.

4. Rickard is a widely published and well-respected Australian historian.

5. If historians are widely published and well respected, then we can be confident that they are a relevant authority.

Think about this example and how similar it is to the basic form of reasoning discussed in chapter 3. Can you see that claims 4 and 5 serve to establish that Rickard is indeed a relevant authority, as asserted in claim 3 (and hence go above this claim in the diagram)? Claim 3, in turn, is added to claim 2 (the reference to Rickard's book) to show its relevance in founding claim 1.

From this example we can see that the reasoning that, logically, underpins the simple use of a reference can be long-winded. However, the lesson to learn from this is not that we should be so explicit and lengthy in our own work. Rather, when we

0 0

Post a comment