Exercise

In the following complex argument, identify how the wording of the claims helps you to see the logic of the five arrows which represent the movement from premise to conclusion.

1. Ian should be jailed for between three and six months for assaulting Michael.

2. Ian threatened to attack Michael.

3. By law, threatening to attack someone is known as 'assault'.

4. Ian assaulted Michael.

5. A recent survey of 200 assault victims found that, for over 150 of them, the assault adversely affected their lives for between three and six months after the incident.

6. In most cases of assault, victims suffer for at least three months after the actual assault has ended.

7. Michael will most likely be adversely affected by the assault for at least three months.

8. Michael was relaxed and happy before the assault.

9. Now, after the assault, Michael is depressed and fearful.

10. Nothing other than the assault has happened to Michael that would cause him to be depressed and fearful.

11. lan's assault on Michael has caused him to be depressed and fearful.

12. If Michael is suffering fear and depression, then it is only right that Ian suffer similarly for a similar period of time.

13. Imprisonment is the only way in which suffering similar to that of Michael's can be inflicted on Ian.

mainp - softvnn.com

In this chapter we have explored, in considerable depth, how linking between claims works in practice. Links between premises allow us to express the complexities that underlie any summary 'reason'. The key property of claims to be noted here is that a claim contains an internal connection, which then is used as the basis for a chain of external links. Sometimes, a premise functions to frame our argument or define some key term. Sometimes we will encounter a single independent premise, but the connection between this premise and its conclusion is weakened by the absence of explicit claims, which are needed to make that connection clear.

The central idea behind developing our use of dependent premise chains is that, when premises add together [+], they do so in relation to the next logical link, from premises to conclusion [¿]. This arrow is used, in the analytical structure, to represent a relationship that is not just plucked from thin air but which exists implicitly in the claims that are the premises. In making this link, we must be careful that there is a consistency in the scope, certainty, and value between premises and conclusion.

The following terms and concepts are introduced in this chapter. Before checking

Answer briefly the following questions, giving, where possible, an example in your answer that is different from those used in this book:

b. What is the difference between a dependent premise and an independent

0 0

Post a comment