You are looking for information, articles, knowledge about the topic nail salons open on sunday near me how is an explanation different from an argument apex on Google, you do not find the information you need! Here are the best content compiled and compiled by the https://chewathai27.com team, along with other related topics such as: how is an explanation different from an argument apex The difference between argument and explanation, Difference between explanation and argument, An inductive argument is not strong when, Deductive and inductive arguments, What is debate, Deductive argument examples, Premise and conclusion, How to Debate in English
An argument is a rationale in which the reason presents evidence in support of a claim made in the conclusion. Its purpose is to provide a basis for believing the conclusion to be true. An explanation is a rationale in which the reason presents a cause of some fact represented by the conclusion.What is the difference between an argument and an explanation? An argument claims to show THAT something is true, while an explanation aims to show WHY a statement is true.In a similar vein, building something and taking it apart are two very different activities, but we typically use the same tools for both. Arguments and explanations both have a single sentence as their primary focus.
- An argument is a rationale in which the reason functions as evidence in support of the conclusion. …
- An explanation is a rationale in which the conclusion represents an accepted fact and the reason represents a cause of that fact.
Contents
What is the difference between an argument and an explanation quizlet?
What is the difference between an argument and an explanation? An argument claims to show THAT something is true, while an explanation aims to show WHY a statement is true.
How do you recognize arguments and explanations?
- An argument is a rationale in which the reason functions as evidence in support of the conclusion. …
- An explanation is a rationale in which the conclusion represents an accepted fact and the reason represents a cause of that fact.
What is the similarities between argument and explanation?
In a similar vein, building something and taking it apart are two very different activities, but we typically use the same tools for both. Arguments and explanations both have a single sentence as their primary focus.
What is difference between argument and statement?
An argument is a group of statements including one or more premises and one and only one conclusion. A statement is a sentence that is either true or false, such as “The cat is on the mat.” Many sentences are not statements, such as “Close the door, please” , “How old are you?”
Which of these summarizes the difference between arguments and explanations Phi 103?
Which of these is true of the differences between arguments and explanations? CORRECT ANSWER: An argument attempts to show that a conclusion is true; an explanation attempts to show why it is true.
What is explanation quizlet?
Quizlet explanations aim to help high school and college students better understand the reasoning and thought process behind study questions so they can practice and apply their learnings on their own. Quizlet’s explanations provide self-learning guidance for high school and college students.
What is the difference between arguments explanations and persuasion?
An argument explains what someone believes, while persuasion attempts to change someone else’s opinion. Many magazine articles are arguments because they choose one point of view and back it up with examples.
What is the difference between argument and reasoning?
An argument may have one reason or multiple reasons to be strong. REASONING are statements that link evidence back to reasons or claims. Reasoning should clearly explain why the evidence is relevant.
What is the difference between description and explanation?
Describe: Describe means to give a lot of details and paint a verbal picture of a situation or idea. Explain: Explain means to make an idea or situation clear to someone by describing it in more detail or revealing relevant facts.
What is the difference between argument and non argument in logic?
A combination of statements are called an argument if there is an intent to persuade or there are conclusion keywords. A statement or a combination of statements is called a non-argument if they merely give information, with no intent to persuade and without conclusion keywords.
What is an example of an explanation?
The definition of an explanation is something that clarifies or makes clear. An example of an explanation is telling how rain forms. The interpretation, meaning, or sense given in explaining.
What is the difference between inference and argument?
An inference is a process of reasoning in which a new belief is formed on the basis of or in virtue of evidence or proof supposedly provided by other beliefs. An argument is a collection of statements or propositions, some of which are intended to provide support or evidence in favor of one of the others.
How is an argumentative essay differ from other types of essay?
The main difference between argumentative and informative essays is that an informative essay contains only information to explain a topic, whereas an argumentative essay contains statistics, facts and writer’s personal ideas.
What is the difference between sentences and statements?
A sentence is a group of words that usually have a subject, verb and information about the subject. Remember: A sentence can be a statement, question or command. A statement is a basic fact or opinion. It is one kind of sentence.
What is an example of explanation?
The definition of an explanation is something that clarifies or makes clear. An example of an explanation is telling how rain forms. The interpretation, meaning, or sense given in explaining.
What is an argument quizlet?
Definition: An argument is a set of statement in which a claim is made, support is offered for it and there is an attempt to influence someone in a context of disagreement.
What is an argument in philosophy quizlet?
argument. a set of statements in which one or more of the statements attempt to provide reasons or evidence for the truth of another statement.
What is the definition of argument that we are using in this course quizlet?
argument. a series of statements, where some, the premises, provide evidence or reasons for others, the conclusions.
Because
- Article author: www.csus.edu
- Reviews from users: 38557
Ratings - Top rated: 3.7
- Lowest rated: 1
- Summary of article content: Articles about Because Updating …
- Most searched keywords: Whether you are looking for Because Updating
- Table of Contents:
Argument and Explanation
- Article author: www.csus.edu
- Reviews from users: 40639 Ratings
- Top rated: 4.6
- Lowest rated: 1
- Summary of article content: Articles about Argument and Explanation Updating …
- Most searched keywords: Whether you are looking for Argument and Explanation Updating
- Table of Contents:
how is an explanation different from an argument apex
- Article author: content.bridgepointeducation.com
- Reviews from users: 486 Ratings
- Top rated: 3.5
- Lowest rated: 1
- Summary of article content: Articles about how is an explanation different from an argument apex Updating …
- Most searched keywords: Whether you are looking for how is an explanation different from an argument apex Updating
- Table of Contents:
LESSON # 1
- Article author: www.uky.edu
- Reviews from users: 37907 Ratings
- Top rated: 3.3
- Lowest rated: 1
- Summary of article content: Articles about LESSON # 1 Updating …
- Most searched keywords: Whether you are looking for LESSON # 1 Updating
- Table of Contents:
How is an explanation different from an argument? – Answers
- Article author: www.answers.com
- Reviews from users: 30578 Ratings
- Top rated: 3.0
- Lowest rated: 1
- Summary of article content: Articles about How is an explanation different from an argument? – Answers An explanation proves information, but an argument asserts a claim. …
- Most searched keywords: Whether you are looking for How is an explanation different from an argument? – Answers An explanation proves information, but an argument asserts a claim. An explanation provides information, but an argument asserts a
claim. - Table of Contents:
A fact is something that is true and you have information to back it up an opinion is what someone think Ex that was the worst game ever Worst the the opinion word because somebody meant think that is the best game ever
Fact
Opinion
Add your answer
What do historians refer when they discuss causation
Read the description of a science experiment below Which part of the experiment is the second step of the scientific method (forming a hypothesis)
What best describes the author’s point of view regarding the American colonies
How were the contributions of Nicolaus Copernicus and Galileo Galilei to the scientific revolution similar
Subjects
Top Categories
Company
Product
Legal
brainly.com
- Article author: brainly.com
- Reviews from users: 22147 Ratings
- Top rated: 4.0
- Lowest rated: 1
- Summary of article content: Articles about brainly.com an arguement is based on emotions depending on the setting and an explanation is an intellectual description. arrenhasyd and 4 more users found this answer … …
- Most searched keywords: Whether you are looking for brainly.com an arguement is based on emotions depending on the setting and an explanation is an intellectual description. arrenhasyd and 4 more users found this answer …
- Table of Contents:
Difference Between Argument and Explanation | Definition, Function, Elements, Comparison
- Article author: pediaa.com
- Reviews from users: 24553 Ratings
- Top rated: 3.3
- Lowest rated: 1
- Summary of article content: Articles about Difference Between Argument and Explanation | Definition, Function, Elements, Comparison The main difference between argument and explanation is that arguments mainly consist of evence whereas explanations mainly consist of causes … …
- Most searched keywords: Whether you are looking for Difference Between Argument and Explanation | Definition, Function, Elements, Comparison The main difference between argument and explanation is that arguments mainly consist of evence whereas explanations mainly consist of causes … What is the difference between Argument and Explanation? Argument attempts to convince someone of something and explanation attempts to clarify something.
- Table of Contents:
Main Difference – Argument vs Explanation
What is an Argument
What is an Explanation
Difference Between Argument and Explanation
Salesforce Developers
- Article author: developer.salesforce.com
- Reviews from users: 8899 Ratings
- Top rated: 4.7
- Lowest rated: 1
- Summary of article content: Articles about Salesforce Developers This example shows how a primitive argument of type String is passed by value into another method. The debugStatusMessage method in this example creates a … …
- Most searched keywords: Whether you are looking for Salesforce Developers This example shows how a primitive argument of type String is passed by value into another method. The debugStatusMessage method in this example creates a … Salesforce Developer Website
- Table of Contents:
Argument ID Practice
- Article author: userweb.ucs.louisiana.edu
- Reviews from users: 23874 Ratings
- Top rated: 4.0
- Lowest rated: 1
- Summary of article content: Articles about Argument ID Practice INSTRUCTIONS: Determine whether each passage contains an argument. … each passage contains a non-argument such as explanation, description, statements. …
- Most searched keywords: Whether you are looking for Argument ID Practice INSTRUCTIONS: Determine whether each passage contains an argument. … each passage contains a non-argument such as explanation, description, statements.
- Table of Contents:
Argument as Dialogue Across Difference: Engaging Youth in Public Literacies – Jennifer Clifton – Google Sách
- Article author: books.google.com.vn
- Reviews from users: 1167 Ratings
- Top rated: 3.3
- Lowest rated: 1
- Summary of article content: Articles about Argument as Dialogue Across Difference: Engaging Youth in Public Literacies – Jennifer Clifton – Google Sách Updating …
- Most searched keywords: Whether you are looking for Argument as Dialogue Across Difference: Engaging Youth in Public Literacies – Jennifer Clifton – Google Sách Updating In the spirit of models of argument starting with inquiry, this book starts with a question: What might it mean to teach argument in ways that open up spaces for change—changes of mind, changes of practice and policy, changes in ways of talking and relating? The author explores teaching argument in ways that take into account the complexities and pluralities young people face as they attempt to enact local and global citizenship with others who may reasonably disagree. The focus is foremost on social action—the hard, hopeful work of finding productive ways forward in contexts where people need to work together across difference to get something worthwhile done.
- Table of Contents:
Business Persons: A Legal Theory of the Firm – Eric W. Orts – Google Sách
- Article author: books.google.com.vn
- Reviews from users: 40682 Ratings
- Top rated: 4.8
- Lowest rated: 1
- Summary of article content: Articles about Business Persons: A Legal Theory of the Firm – Eric W. Orts – Google Sách Updating …
- Most searched keywords: Whether you are looking for Business Persons: A Legal Theory of the Firm – Eric W. Orts – Google Sách Updating Business firms are ubiquitous in modern society, but an appreciation of how they are formed and for what purposes requires an understanding of their legal foundations. This book provides a scholarly and yet accessible introduction to the legal framework of modern business enterprises. It explains the legal ideas that allow for the recognition of firms as organizational “persons” having social rights and responsibilities. Other foundational ideas include an overview of how the laws of agency, contracts, and property fit together to compose the organized “persons” known as business firms. The institutional legal theory of the firm developed embraces both a “bottom-up” perspective of business participants and a “top-down” rule-setting perspective of government. Other chapters in the book discuss the features of limited liability and the boundaries of firms. A typology of different kinds of firms is presented ranging from entrepreneurial one-person start-ups to complex corporations, as well as new forms of hybrid social enterprises. Practical applications include contribution to the debates surrounding corporate executive compensation and political free-speech rights of corporations.
- Table of Contents:
Argument-driven Inquiry in Biology: Lab Investigations for Grades 9-12 – Victor Sampson – Google Sách
- Article author: books.google.com.vn
- Reviews from users: 38476 Ratings
- Top rated: 3.9
- Lowest rated: 1
- Summary of article content: Articles about Argument-driven Inquiry in Biology: Lab Investigations for Grades 9-12 – Victor Sampson – Google Sách Updating …
- Most searched keywords: Whether you are looking for Argument-driven Inquiry in Biology: Lab Investigations for Grades 9-12 – Victor Sampson – Google Sách Updating Are you interested in using argument-driven inquiry for high school lab instruction but just aren’t sure how to do it? You aren’t alone. This book will provide you with both the information and instructional materials you need to start using this method right away. Argument-Driven Inquiry in Biology is a one-stop source of expertise, advice, and investigations. The book is broken into two basic parts: 1. An introduction to the stages of argument-driven inquiry–from question identification, data analysis, and argument development and evaluation to double-blind peer review and report revision. 2. A well-organized series of 27 field-tested labs that cover molecules and organisms, ecosystems, heredity, and biological evolution. The investigations are designed to be more authentic scientific experiences than traditional laboratory activities. They give your students an opportunity to design their own methods, develop models, collect and analyze data, generate arguments, and critique claims and evidence. Because the authors are veteran teachers, they designed Argument-Driven Inquiry in Biology to be easy to use and aligned with today’s standards. The labs include reproducible student pages and teacher notes. The investigations will help your students learn the core ideas, crosscutting concepts, and scientific practices found in the Next Generation Science Standards. In addition, they offer ways for students to develop the disciplinary skills outlined in the Common Core State Standards. Many of today’s teachers–like you–want to find new ways to engage students in scientific practices and help students learn more from lab activities. Argument-Driven Inquiry in Biology does all of this even as it gives students the chance to practice reading, writing, speaking, and using math in the context of science.
- Table of Contents:
Levels of Argument: A Comparative Study of Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s … – Dominic Scott – Google Sách
- Article author: books.google.com.vn
- Reviews from users: 45272 Ratings
- Top rated: 3.7
- Lowest rated: 1
- Summary of article content: Articles about Levels of Argument: A Comparative Study of Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s … – Dominic Scott – Google Sách Updating …
- Most searched keywords: Whether you are looking for Levels of Argument: A Comparative Study of Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s … – Dominic Scott – Google Sách Updating In Levels of Argument, Dominic Scott compares the Republic and Nicomachean Ethics from a methodological perspective. In the first half he argues that the Republic distinguishes between two levels of argument in the defence of justice, the ‘longer’ and ‘shorter’ routes. The longer is the ideal and aims at maximum precision, requiring knowledge of the Forms and a definition of the Good. The shorter route is less precise, employing hypotheses, analogies and empirical observation. This is the route that Socrates actually follows in the Republic, because it is appropriate to the level of his audience and can stand on its own feet as a plausible defence of justice. In the second half of the book, Scott turns to the Nicomachean Ethics. Scott argues that, even though Aristotle rejects a universal Form of the Good, he implicitly recognises the existence of longer and shorter routes, analogous to those distinguished in the Republic. The longer route would require a comprehensive theoretical worldview, incorporating elements from Aristotle’s metaphysics, physics, psychology, and biology. But Aristotle steers his audience away from such an approach as being a distraction from the essentially practical goals of political science. Unnecessary for good decision-making, it is not even an ideal. In sum, Platonic and Aristotelian methodologies both converge and diverge. Both distinguish analogously similar levels of argument, and it is the shorter route that both philosophers actually follow—Plato because he thinks it will have to suffice, Aristotle because he thinks that there is no need to go beyond it.
- Table of Contents:
See more articles in the same category here: https://chewathai27.com/toplist.
Because
5.1 Two kinds of rationale: argument and explanation In section 3 we observed that there are two kinds of reason: evidence and cause. These two kinds of reason correspond to two kinds of rationale: argument and explanation. We define these concepts as follows: An argument is a rationale in which the reason presents evidence in support of a claim made in the conclusion. Its purpose is to provide a basis for believing the conclusion to be true.
An explanation is a rationale in which the reason presents a cause of some fact represented by the conclusion. Its purpose is to help us understand how or why that fact occurs. The best way to remember the difference between argument and explanation is to think of them as answering two different questions. An argument answers the question: How do you know ? This is a request for evidence.
An explanation answers the question: Why is that so? This is a request for a cause. Here is a diagram representing these relationships. It is important to develop a solid grasp of the relationships represented above, and to learn to use the terms exactly as they have been defined. All of these words have meanings in ordinary language that are not precisely the same as the ones we give them here. For example, most people think of an argument as a kind of verbal dispute, but here it a particular kind of logical structure: it is a rationale in which evidence is given for the truth of some claim. Similarly, we often think of an explanation as just a description or account of the facts. Here, however, an explanation is another kind of logical structure: it is a rationale that provides a cause of some accepted fact. You will also get profoundly unsatisfactory results if you think of the difference between argument and explanation in vaguer terms than represented above. For example, it will not do to think of explanation as a kind of rationale that is “based on facts” or an argument as rationale that is “based on opinions”. Phrases like these are just too vague distinguish these two kinds of rationale. 5.2 Knowledge and understanding It is sometimes said that the purpose of inquiry is to provide knowledge and understanding of the world. This is a useful expression to remember as it accurately reflects the distinction between argument and explanation. We create knowledge by providing evidence for our views; i.e., by constructing arguments. We create understanding by discovering the causal structure of the world; i.e., by constructing explanations. This expression also helps us to remember that argument and explanation make equally important contributions to rational inquiry. Many people- even many people who write logic books- are under the impression that reasoning is all about learning to make and evaluate arguments. But this formulation neglects the fact that we devote an equal amount of reasoning to understanding facts that have already been established. 5.3 Simple Examples In the next few sections we will be discussing ways of distinguishing argumentative from explanatory reasoning. This can actually be a pretty challenging task. This is partly because the majority of reasoning is perpetrated by ordinary folks who have never been taught the difference between argument and explanation. It’s also partly because people sometimes argue and explain at the same time, again without really knowing what they are doing. In fact, given the potential for confusion, it is actually surprising how often we can determine whether the reasoning we are given is mainly argumentative or explanatory in nature. For now, let’s just look at a simple example to make sure we have the distinction between argument and explanation dialed in. Consider this: I think Hazel must have forgotten about our appointment. She’s an hour late. This reasoning is most plausibly reconstructed as an argument. The speaker claims that Hazel has forgotten the appointment, and gives as evidence for this conclusion, that Hazel is an hour late. We reconstruct it as follows: (Note: Because we now know that the conclusion of a rationale is always written on the right and the reasons are always written on the left, we will no longer label them as such. However, under the conclusion we will now identify the rationale as either an argument or an explanation.) Now here is an example in which the same basic information is presented in a different way. Hazel is an hour late for our appointment because she forgot about it. In this form, the reasoning is most plausibly reconstructed as an explanation. The speaker points out the fact that Hazel is an hour late for the appointment, and proposes a particular cause of that fact, namely that Hazel forgot about it. You’ll recall that at the end of section 3 we noted that cause and evidence have a reciprocal relationship: smoke is evidence for fire because fire causes smoke. Although this relationship is not always apparent, it is in this case. In the argument, Hazel’s tardiness is offered as evidence that she forgot the appointment. In the explanation, Hazel’s having forgotten the appointment is presented as the cause of her tardiness. 5.3 Are there any keywords that help to construct rationales? There are no simple keywords or linguistic indicators that reliably distinguish argumentative from explanatory reasoning. Looking at the argument you might say that the phrases I think and must have suggest that the speaker is arguing. On the other hand, regarding the explanation, we might say that the use of the word because seems to indicate that a cause is being offered. Unfortunately these indicators can’t be reliably generalized. Consider: I think the fact that Hazel is an hour late must be because she forgot about our appointment. This example, like the argument above, contains the phrases I think and the word must, but it is still best construed as an explanation of the fact that Hazel is late. It is, however, useful to note that the word because is a very reliable indicator of the reason/conclusion relationship. Unlike the words so, hence, thus, and therefore, which indicate that a conclusion is about to be given, the word because indicates that a reason is about to be given. Whether it is an argument or an explanation, almost any sentence of the form A because B will be properly reconstructed so that A is the conclusion and B is the reason. 5.3 Extended arguments and explanations We noted in section 4 that rationales can be extended into branching and chaining patterns. This applies to arguments and explanations to an equal degree. It is very important to understand that arguments and explanations make distinct contributions to rational inquiry, and it is equally important not to conflate them. In the case of branching and chaining rationales, conflation can occur by including reasons that are functioning as evidence and reasons that are functioning as cause in the same rationale. Consider this example: Martha: I think the battery on my iPod is worn out. It doesn’t play as long as it used to. I guess it’s just been recharged too many times. Now here is one possible reconstruction of this reasoning. The relation between R1 and the conclusion is clearly evidential in nature: the fact that Martha’s iPod doesn’t play as long as it used to is presented as evidence that the battery is worn out. However, R2 is not additional evidence that the battery is worn out. Rather, it is a proposed cause. Hence, what Martha has given us here is actually an argument combined with an explanation. We will see later that this is extremely common. The important thing to understand for now is that we never combine the two types of rationale. If we identify a rationale as an argument, then every reason in the rationale must be evidential in nature. Similarly, if we identify a a rationale as an explanation, then every reason in the rationale must be causal in nature. Hence, the proper reconstruction of this reasoning would actually be two distinct rationales as follows: You will notice that in this case the two distinct rationales have precisely the same conclusion, which can seem redundant or unnecessarily cumbersome. It is a bit cumbersome, but it is important to separate them nevertheless. To understand why it can help to think of the argument as as a function that inputs evidence and outputs factual knowledge. Hence, the output of the argument becomes the input of the explanation conclusion. Put differently, if an argument is supported with good evidence, then we are inclined to treat its conclusion as a fact. At that point, it becomes reasonable to ask for another kind of rationale, namely an explanation of that fact.
Argument and Explanation
Rational Reconstruction 1: Argument and Explanation
Review:
Rationales are models we use to reveal the logical relationships underlying our reasoning. We call the process of identifying these rationales “rational reconstruction.” The simplest possible rationale consists of one reason connected to a conclusion by a principle. A rationale may contain multiple reasons and principles, but it has one and only one conclusion. The simplest possible rationale looks like this.
Note that the reason is positioned to the left of the conclusion and that the principle is indicated by an arrow pointing from left to right. Always use exactly this format when constructing rationales.
There are two kinds of rationale: argument and explanation . Rational reconstruction depends critically on the ability to distinguish one from the other. The distinction is this:
An argument is a rationale in which the reason functions as evidence in support of the conclusion. Its purpose is to provide a rational basis for believing the conclusion to be true.
An explanation is a rationale in which the conclusion represents an accepted fact and the reason represents a cause of that fact. Its purpose is to help us understand how or why that fact occurs.
In the beginning the best way to remember the difference between arguments and explanations is to think of them as answering two different questions.
An argument answers the question: How do you know?
An explanation answers the question: Why is that so?
Work
Example 1: Butch must be afraid of clowns. Butch fled the theater when Bobo the clown appeared.
Rap: This example expresses the opinion that Butch is afraid of clowns, and gives us a reason to believe it: Butch ran away when a clown appeared. Notice that the sentences in the boxes are not simply cut and pasted from the example. The word ‘must’ has been deleted from the conclusion, because the statement “Butch must be afraid of clowns” isn’t what the speaker is arguing for. We simplified the reason because the place and the name of the clown aren’t needed to grasp the evidential relationship. When constructing rationales you should always simplify the reasons and conclusions by eliminating jargon and logically irrelevant information.
Example 2 : Butch is afraid of clowns because he was attacked by one as a child.
Rap: This example informs us that Butch is afraid of clowns. It does not try to convince us of this; rather, it explains why this is the case: Butch was attacked by a clown as a child. Notice that our rationale contains complete sentences and that the pronouns “one” and “he” have been replaced by the corresponding nouns. This is essential for clarity. Every reason and conclusion should make sense on its own; specifically, we should not have to refer to the content of other boxes to find out what the statement means.
Example 3 : The United States invaded Iraq in order to seize control of Iraq’s vast oil reserves.
Rap: This example makes a claim that many people will disagree with. Because of this, it is tempting to characterize it as an unsubstantiated opinion, and therefore an argument. Some discipline is required here. This is an explanation because the speaker identifies the well known fact that the United States invaded Iraq and then provides a possible cause. You may think that the causes identified in an explanation are hypothetical, speculative or completely erroneous. It is important to understand that whether something is an explanation or an argument depends on what the author believes to be the case, not you. To register disagreement with the above rationale, you would not characterize it as an argument, but simply as an explanation you disagree with.
Example 4 : The reason the United States should not have invaded Iraq is that it had no clear plan for maintaining law and order once Sadaam Hussein’s government had been toppled.
Rap: This is an example of an argument for a normative conclusion . It is natural to say here that the speaker is explaining why the U.S. should not have invaded Iraq. However, this is not an explanation in our sense of the term because there is no sense in which the reason represents a cause of some fact represented by the conclusion. The conclusion does not simply represent the fact that the U.S. invaded Iraq (as in Example 3) but attaches a certain moral value (bad) to that fact. Clearly, the reasoning is designed to convince us that the U.S. should not have invaded Iraq. (In general, whenever the conclusion of a rationale is a value judgment, the rationale is an argument.)
Example 5 : In my opinion scientists who do not want creation science taught alongside the theory of evolution in our public schools are just moral cowards.
Example 6 : Rabbits may taste like chicken, but the fact of that matter is that rabbit is not poultry.
Rap: There are no rationales for Examples 5 and 6, because they contain no reasoning. Example 5 is simply an opinion about the moral character of some scientists. Example 6 is just two statements: rabbits taste like chicken and rabbit isn’t poultry. These examples are here to show you that phrases like “In my opinion” and “The fact of the matter” don’t automatically mean that an argument or an explanation is in the offing.
Example 7 : In my opinion, the reason that animals do not feel pain is that animals don’t have souls .
Rap: This example combines some features already discussed. Do not be mislead by the phrase “in my opinion” into calling this an argument. The opinion being asserted here is the entire explanation. Also, note that the rather outlandish claim that animals do not feel pain is being asserted by the speaker as a fact. He does not give any evidence for this, but simply explains why it is so. Hence, as in Example 3, you should not call this an argument simply because you regard the conclusion as a false opinion. Rather, you should call it an explanation because the author apparently regards it as a fact. In calling it an explanation you are in no way committed to accepting it as a fact yourself.
Example 8: Sure, I drink quite a bit, but I don’t think that makes me an alcoholic because I don’t let it affect my work.
Rap: This is pretty clearly an argument. You’ll notice that to avoid the use of pronouns, we just substituted a fictitious name. Also note that we were able to combine the independent sentences “I drink quite a bit” and “I don’t let it affect my work” into one simple sentence that captures both assertions.
Example 9 : I think the reason Barb always feels sick at work is that she has a serious drinking problem.
Rap: Note that we’ve rewritten the reason to eliminate the slightly ambiguous phrase “drinking problem”. We call this a psychological explanation, because the fact being explained is a certain psychological state of a person, namely Barb’s well-being.
Example 10
The reason Barb believes she’s not an alcoholic is that she thinks her drinking doesn’t affect her work.
Rap: As in example 9, the conclusion here is also psychological in nature; it refers to one of Barb’s beliefs. You might initially think that because we are talking about a belief or opinion, this must be an argument. But we often represent people’s beliefs simply as facts about them . In this case the author claims that it is a fact that Barb believes she’s not an alcoholic, and further claims that a cause of this fact is another one of Barb’s beliefs, namely that Barb’s drinking doesn’t affect her work.
Now p ay special attention this : The reason in this rationale retains the phrase “Barb believes” because the claim here is that one of Barb’s beliefs is causing another of Barb’s beliefs. If we had eliminated reference to Barb’s beliefs entirely we would have had
But this would be wrong because the author is committed to neither the conclusion nor the reason of this rationale. For all we know, the author of this passage may actually believe that Barb is an alcoholic and that her drinking does affect her work. In fact, the ultimate point of this explanation may be to show that Barb is in a state of denial about her drinking problem.
Example 11 : Kip and La Fawnda are in love. Kip and La Fawnda are getting married.
Interpretation 1
Interpretation 2
Rap: This example is devoid of any clues that would help us to decide between the above interpretations. If it had read “Kip and La Fawnda are getting married because they are in love” then the explanation would be the correct interpretation. If it had read “Kip and La Fawnda are getting married. They must be in love!” then the argument interpretation would be correct. Indeed, because of the absence of any clues in this regard, it is plausible to claim that there is really no reasoning here at all. Even though these statements can be related as above, for all we know the author might just have intended them as two distinct observations.
The ambiguity of this passage is highly instructive. Here are two important points to think about.
First , there are times when it will be difficult or even impossible to tell whether reasoning offered is argumentative or explanatory in nature. Usually, however, there is some kind of verbal hint that makes one interpretation more plausible than the other. Although ordinary people do not operate with our refined understanding of the concepts of argument and explanation, they usually do have some idea whether they are trying to convince us of something or, alternatively, to help us understand why it is the case.
LESSON # 1
LESSON # 1
Arguments, Premises And Conclusions
Reading Assignment: 1.1 (pp. 1-7)
Click here to bypass the following discussion and go straight to the assignments.
Logic is the science that evaluates arguments.
An argument is a group of statements including one or more premises and one and only one conclusion.
A statement is a sentence that is either true or false, such as “The cat is on the mat.” Many sentences are not statements, such as “Close the door, please” , “How old are you?”
A premise is a statement in an argument that provides reason or support for the conclusion. There can be one or many premises in a single argument.
A conclusion is a statement in an argument that indicates of what the arguer is trying to convince the reader/listener. What is the argument trying to prove? There can be only one conclusion in a single argument.
In this lesson you will need to be able to distinguish premises and conclusions:
The foolproof way to do this is to ask yourself what the author of the argument is trying to get you to believe. The answer to this question is the conclusion.
There must also be at least one reason and possibly many. These are your premises.
Your common sense will be of great help here.
You should also study very carefully the lists of premise and conclusion indicator words on page 3 in the text. There will not always be indicator words, though more often than not there are. You should note as well that the conclusion can often be identified as the statement directly before a premise indicator. Remember that these are general rules only. Think of indicator words as “red flags.” They are positioned in the argument to signal the author’s intent, but always check yourself by asking what’s being proven, and what the proof is.
When you feel confident that you have mastered these concepts, do the True/False exercise on p. 13 in the textbook. (section IV) You can check your answers in the appendix of this study guide.
Then do exercises 1.1 I 1-22 on your Logic Coach Software. If you need more practice, feel free to do more. If you use up all the exercises in section I, you may do problems from II and send the answers to me to get checked (this section of the text isn’t on Logic Coach)
When you are ready, complete the following assignments, using the book as little as possible. Hand in both of the following assignments together with a copy of your logic coach record screen. For more detailed instructions on doing this click here.
ASSIGNMENT 1:
Rewrite the following arguments listing the premise(s) first and the conclusion last. Each line should be a single statement written as a complete sentence. Feel free to modify the sentences as you deem necessary, without changing their basic meaning. (after all you want to be restating this argument, not writing a new one!) Label the premise(s) P¹, P², P³, etc. and the conclusion C. Leave out any indicator words and any fluff (i.e., sentences which are neither the conclusion nor a premise). 10 points each.
EXAMPLE:
Cats with long hair shed all over the house so you should not get a long-haired cat.
I have heard that they also have lots of fleas.
P¹ Long-haired cats shed all over the house P² Long-haired cats have a lot of fleas C You should not get a long haired cat
So you have finished reading the how is an explanation different from an argument apex topic article, if you find this article useful, please share it. Thank you very much. See more: The difference between argument and explanation, Difference between explanation and argument, An inductive argument is not strong when, Deductive and inductive arguments, What is debate, Deductive argument examples, Premise and conclusion, How to Debate in English
