Critical Analysis and

Reasoning in Discipline-
based Studies
Ch.2 Reasoning
Shall we believe these facts?
 Biologists tell us that we are closely related to
chimpanzees. ⽣物學家告訴我們，我們與⿊猩猩關係密切。
 Geologists tell us that Africa and South America
used to be joined together. 地質學家告訴我們，非洲和南美洲曾經是連在⼀起的。
 Cosmologists tell us that the universe is
expanding. 宇宙學家告訴我們宇宙正在膨脹。

Q: how did scientists reach these

unlikely-sounding conclusions?
 沒有⼈⾒過⼀個物種從另⼀個物種進化⽽來，或者⼀個⼤陸分裂成兩個，或者宇宙變得越來越⼤。

 No one has ever seen one species evolve from

another, or a single continent split into two, or
the universe is getting bigger.
 Answer is that scientists arrived at these beliefs
by a process of reasoning or inference.
答案是科學家通過推理或推理過程得出這些信念。
Terminology
 Conclusions are beliefs; when they are
expressed using true-or-false declarative
sentence, they are claims (statements or
assertions).
 Beliefs are the same as judgements and
opinions.
 A belief (or opinion or claim or statement etc.)
whose truth is independent of whether people
think it is true, is objective.
Terminology: Values and Facts
 A fact is a truth about a portion of the world.

For example, water is H2O is a scientific fact and HKU

SPACE has a campus in Kowloon Bay is an ordinary fact.

 On the other hand, value is about evaluation (by humans

unless otherwise stated).

For example, “It is good to be courteous to others” states

the speaker’s valuation of a certain kind of behavior.

5
What is a statement?
 A statement is any indicative sentence that is
either true or false.
Examples:
1. Galileo was an astronomer.
2. Provided the fetus is a person, a fetus has a
right to life.
3. Lung cancer is not caused by smoking.
4. Everybody deliberates about alternative
courses of action
 Interrogatives, imperatives, and exclamations
are sentences that are NOT statements.
Example
1. Is George Washington president?
2. Shave yourself!
3. Wow!
What is an Argument?
 An argument consists of two parts.
 One part gives a reason for accepting the other part.
 The part that provides the reason is called the
_________ of the argument.
 The other part is called the __________.
 Conclusion of an argument is what the premise
supports or demonstrates.
Recall your memory:
 Conclusion is what the premise supports or
demonstrates in an argument.
Are these arguments?
Example 1
 A dog would keep me company; so I should get
one.

Example 2
 My landlord will raise my rent; so I shouldn’t get
one.
 From the two arguments above, they both address the
issue of whether I should get a dog.
 Premise of the example 1 [a dog would keep me
company] gives a reason for saying I should get a dog.
 Premise of the example 2 [my landlord will raise my rent]
gives a reason for saying I should not get a dog.
Task 1:
 State the premises (P) and conclusion (C) in the
following example.

1: All Frenchmen like red wine.

2: Pierre is a Frenchmen.
3: Therefore, Pierre likes red wine.

 P: ________
 C: ________
Task 2:
 What is the conclusion(s) and the premise(s) in the following
statements?

Drinking water daily is good for your health as it cleans out your
liver and reduces the level of toxins in your blood.

 Conclusion:
_______________________________________

 Premises:
 ____________________________________
 ____________________________________
Consider the following Arguments :
Argument 1:
 Provided the fetus is a person, a fetus has a
right to life. Should a fetus have a right to life, it
is false that someone has the right to take its life.
However, if abortions are moral, someone does
have the right to take the life of a fetus.
Consequently, if a fetus is a person, abortions
are not moral.
Argument 2:
 Lung cancer is not caused by smoking, and this
is so for the following reasons. Lung cancer is
more common among male smokers than
among female smokers. If smoking were the
cause of lung cancer, this would not be true. The
fact that lung cancer is more common among
male smokers implies that it is caused by
something in the male makeup. But if caused by
this, it is not caused by smoking.
Argument 3:
 Anyone who deliberates about alternative
courses of action believes he is free. Since
everybody deliberates about alternative courses
of action, it follows that we all believe ourselves
to be free.
What do these arguments in
common?
 Contain a set of statements
 One of which is the conclusion – the
statement allegedly being defended
 The others are the premises – statements
allegedly providing the defense
 Relationship between the conclusion and the
premises is that the conclusion follows from
the premises.
Which of the following statements
is/are argument(s)?
1. God exists.
2. God exists. That’s as plain as the nose on your
face.
3. God exists, and if you don’t believe it, you will
go to hell.
4. I think God exists, because I was raised a
Baptist.
5. God exists because something had to cause
the universe.
Answer:
 Statement _____________

 Identify the premise and the conclusion

 Premise:
_____________________________________
 Conclusion:
_____________________________________
Are these arguments?
1. In 1996, 47% of all females in custody in
Australia were Aboriginal.
2. Wearing a seatbelt reduces the risk of injury.
3. The government should spend more money on
healthcare.
4. If you drink too much alcohol, you will damage
your brain.
5. Analysis is the process of breaking up a
concept, proposition, or fact into its simple or
ultimate constituents.
6. I was late home because my car wouldn’t start.
7. Most plants need plenty of water. Adding
nutrients and aerating the soil can help them
grow.

_________________________
To sum up….
 An argument is NOT…
1. A statement of fact
2. An assertion or claim
3. A prescriptive statement
4. A conditional statement
5. A definition
6. An explanation
7. A series of statements about the same thing
Conclusion Indicators
 Words in the following list indicate that a premise
has been offered and that a conclusion is about
to be presented in arguments. (Three dots
represent the claim that is the conclusion.)

Examples of Conclusion Indicators

Thus… Consequently…
Therefore… So…
Hence… Accordingly…
This shows that… This implies that…
This suggests that… This proves that…
Conclusion Indicators - example
 Stacy dives a Porsche. This suggests that either
she is rich or her parents are.
 The conclusion is
Either Stacy is rich or her parents are.
 The premise is
Stacy drives a Prosche.
Premises Indicators
 Words in the following list are used in arguments,
they introduce premises. They often occur after
a conclusion has been given.
Examples of Premises Indicators
Since…
For…
In view of…
This is implied by…
Premises Indicators - example
 Either Stacy is rich or her parents are, since she
drives a Porsche.
 The premise is
the claim that Stacy drives a Porsche
 The conclusion is
the claim that either Stacy is rich or her
parents are
Exceptions
 Many paragraphs contain arguments but none of
these indicators.
 Indicators are often used as neither conclusion
nor premise indicators. Refer to the following
examples.
Exception samples
For each of the below sentence, highlight the word
that is not function as an indicator.

 How long has it been since you last saw him?

 He is so good at what he does.
 For two years he has been away.
 After all these days, you come home.
Putting Arguments into a Standard
Format
4 Steps are involved:
1. Identifying the premises and the conclusion.
2. Placing the premises first.
3. Placing the conclusion last.
4. Making explicit any premises or even the
conclusion, which may be only implicit in the
original but essential to the argument.
Example: Put argument 1 in slide 14 into a
standard form.
1. Provided the fetus is a person, a fetus has a
right to life.
2. Should a fetus have a right to life, it is false that
someone has the right to take its life.
3. If abortions are moral, someone does have the
right to take the life of a fetus.
4. If a fetus is a person, abortions are not moral.
 Statement ____________ are premises.
 Statement _______ is the conclusion.
Put argument 2 in slide 15 into a standard
form.
1. Lung cancer is more common among male smokers
than among female smokers.
2. If smoking were the cause of lung cancer, this would
not be true.
3. The fact that lung cancer is more common among male
smokers implies that it is caused by something in the
male makeup.
4. If it is caused by this, it is not caused by smoking.
5. Lung cancer is not caused by smoking.
 Statement __________are premises.
 Statement ______ is the conclusion.
Put argument 3 in slide 16 into a standard
form.
1. Anyone who deliberates about alternative
courses of action believes he is free.
2. Everybody deliberates about alternative
courses of action,
3. We all believe ourselves to be free.
 Statement _________ are premises.
 Statement ______ is the conclusion.
Multiple conclusions
1. All women are mortal and rational.
2. Andrea is a woman.
3. So, Andrea is rational.
4. So, Andrea is mortal.

(1) - (2) are _________,

(3) - (4) are _________.
 (1) – (3) make one argument.
 (1) - (2) and (4) make another distinct argument.
Task 3:
State the premises (P) and conclusion (C) in the following
example. How could they form an argument?
5. Killing children is evil.
6. Children were being killed in Bosnia.
7. Therefore, someone was doing something evil
in Bosnia.
8. When someone does something evil, he should
be punished.
9. So, whoever killed children in Bosnia should be
punished.
Answer
 __________are premises of an argument with
________ as its conclusions.
 _________ is also the premise of an
argument , which along with ______________,
has ___________ as its conclusion.
Rationality
 This is a very important but often-abused
concept.
 If you praise a person as rational, what quality
do you find commendable in her?
 Can you explain what is instrumental rationality?
 Is there a difference between behaving and
believing rationally?
 What counts as irrationality?

36
 In most general terms, a person is rational
insofar as her reasoning and behaviors conform
to the basic laws of thought.
 But what are the laws of thoughts?

37
 In the Western context, there are two fundamental
laws of thought: (1) the law of contradiction and (2)
the law of excluded middle .
 (1) states that for all propositions p, it is impossible
for both p and not p to be true.
 (2) states that either p or p must be true, there
being no third or middle true proposition between
them.

38
Maximizing Truths vs. Minimizing Errors
 A simple dilemma in reasoning is whether we ought
to maximize the truth or to minimize the falsehood
we can obtain at the end of inquiry.
 To fulfill the first objective, we can simply believe
anything.
 On the contrary, to minimize believing falsehood, we
can refuse to believe anything.
 For example, if one wants to avoid financial loss,
she can just refrain from any investment. But from
another perspective, this cautious person has in fact
lost a lot of opportunities for financial gains.

39
A Logical Understanding of
Reasoning
 When we reason, we aim to obtain a conclusion
based on certain assumptions, which are usually
called premises.
 There are rules we need to follow in order to
perform the reasoning well.
 That means we are not free to derive any
conclusion based on the same set of premises.
 In casual settings, people sometimes
whimsically conclude whatever they prefer by
free association.
40
Symbolization
 It is easier to learn the reasoning process
through symbolizing the arguments. The
symbolized arguments represent the core
structures of the actual arguments.
 For example, P1, P2, …, Pn  C symbolizes an
argument with n premises and a conclusion.
 With the symbolized argument, we can
substitute the actual content of the argument we
have in mind to recover the original argument.

41
Deductive Reasoning
 Deductive arguments are ones where the truth
of the premises guarantees the truth of the
conclusion.
 In other words, whenever we are employing a
deductive argument, we do not accept that the
truth of all the premises will lead us to a false
換句話說，每當我們使⽤演繹論證時，我們都不接受所有前提的真
conclusion. 實性會導致我們得出錯誤的結論。
 i.e. if the premises are true, then the conclusion
must be true.
 _________________
Inductive Reasoning
 An inductive argument is one where the truth of
the premises only make the truth of the
conclusion ___________.
 In simple terms, we are at best making good
guesses when we reason from the premises to
the conclusion of an inductive argument.

44
Consider the following example:
Is the below reasoning deductive or inductive?

 The first five eggs in the box were rotten.

 All the eggs have the same best-before date
stamped on them.
 Therefore, the sixth egg will be rotten too.

前提不包含結論。

____________, the premises do not entail the conclusion.

Explanation
 Even if the first five eggs were indeed rotten,
and even if all the eggs do have the same best-
before date stamped on them, this does not
____________ that the sixth egg will be rotten
too.
 i.e. it is logically possible for the premises to be
true and yet the conclusion false.
 We move from premises about objects we
have examined to conclusions about objects
we haven’t examined.
我們從關於我們已經檢查過的對象的前提轉移到關於我們尚未檢查過的對象的結論。
 [Link]

Deduction and Induction

Two main types of reasoning:

I. _____________
II. _____________

42
Do we rely on inductive reasoning
throughout our lives?
 When you turn on your computer in the morning,
you are confident it will not explode in your face.
 Why?
 Because you turn on your computer every
morning, and it has never exploded in your face
up to now.
 Is this reasoning deductive or inductive?
 Does the premise of this reasoning entail the
conclusion?
這種推理的前提是否包含結論？
Do scientists use inductive reasoning?
 Consider an example in the next slide (example
1), a genetic disease known as Down’s
syndrome (DS).
 Geneticists tells us that DS sufferers have an
additional chromosome – they have 47 instead
of the normal 46.
 How do they know this?
Example 1:
A complete set of chromosome of a person with Down
syndrome

There are three copies of chromosome 21, as opposed to the two

copies most people have, giving 47 chromosomes.
科學 家 們 檢查 了 ⼤量 的 DS 患者， 發現 每個 ⼈ 都 有 ⼀ 條 額外 的 染⾊ 體。
他們 歸納 推理 得出 的 結論 是， 所有 DS 患者， 包括 他們 沒有 檢查 過 的 患者， 都 有 ⼀ 條 額外 的 染⾊ 體。
研究 樣本 中 的 DS 患者 有 47 條 染⾊ 體 這 ⼀ 事實 並 不能 證明 所有 DS 患者 都 有。

 Scientists examined a large number of DS

sufferers and found that each had an additional
chromosome.
 They reasoned inductively to the
conclusion that all DS sufferers, including ones
they hadn’t examined, have an additional
chromosome.
 The fact that DS sufferers in the sample studied
had 47 chromosomes doesn’t prove that all DS
sufferers do.
Example 2
 Newton's principle of universal gravitation
 Everybody in the universe exerts a gravitational
attraction on every other body.
 Newton did not arrive at the principle by examining every
single body in the whole universe. Rather, he saw that
the principle held true for the planets and the sun, and
for objects of various sorts moving near the earth’s
surface.
 From this data, he inferred that the principle held true for
all bodies.
 There is no guarantee this principle holds true for all
bodies.
 據 報紙 報導， 科學 家 發現“ 實驗 證據” 表明 轉 基因 ⽟⽶ 對 ⼈類 是
安全 的。 這 是 什麼 意思？ 科學 家 們 已經 在 ⼤量 ⼈類 ⾝上 測試 了

Example 3
這 種 ⽟⽶， 但 沒有 ⼀ 個 ⼈ 受到 任何 傷害。 證明 ⽟⽶ 是 安全 的
嗎？？ 這裡 使⽤ 了 什麼 樣 的 推理？

 According to a newspaper report, scientists have

found “experimental proof” that genetically
modified maize is safe for humans.
 What does this mean?
 Scientists have tested the maize on a large
number of humans, and none of them have
come to any harm.
 Does it prove that the maize is safe??
 What sorts of reasoning is using here?
 For the reasoning, “maize didn’t harm any of the
people on whom it was tested” to “the maize will
not harm anyone” is inductive, not deductive.
 The newspaper report should said that scientists
have found extremely good evidence that the
maize is safe for humans.
 The word “proof” should strictly be used when
we deal with deductive reasoning.
Terminology
 Terms are used in a restricted way when we
study logic.
 “Valid” and “invalid” apply only to
____________.
 “True” and “false” apply only to
____________.
Further Examples
 P1: Donald Trump is a man.
 P2: All men must eat.
 C: Donald Trump must eat.

 P3: Donald trump is rich.

 P4: Rich men are usually happy.
 C: Donald Trump is happy.

55
 First example is meant to be __________
whereas the second is __________.
 The main problem facing students is that it is
regarded as commonsense which arguments
are supposed to be used deductively and which
inductively. Most of the time, we need to rely on
the context to know which is which.

56
Validity 有效性與前提或結論的真實性或虛假性無關。

 Validity is not about the actual truth or falsity of

the premises or the conclusion.
 Validity is about the ___________________
between the premises and the conclusion.
⼀個有效的論證是前提的真實性保證了結論的真實性，但有效性並不保證前提實際上是真實的。
 A valid argument is one where the truth of the
premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion,
but validity does not guarantee that the premises
are in fact true.
 What validity tells us is that if the premises are
______, the conclusion must also be _______.
Video watching
 [Link]
annotation_3985628257&feature=iv&src_vid=3P
0fUHUaZcs&v=kdJ6aGToDlo
Definition of a deductively valid
argument, or valid argument:
 An argument is valid if and only if there is no
logically possible situation where all the
premises are true and the conclusion is false at
the same time.
Examples of deductively valid
argument
 P1: All As are Bs.
 P2: This is an A.
 C: Therefore, this is a B.

 If x is an acid, it will turn litmus paper red. (pq)

 The litmus paper did not turn red. (q)
 Therefore, x is not an acid. (∴q )
Task:
Which of the following items (1) to (6) is
deductively valid?
1. Lucy either plays tennis or basketball.
She does not play tennis.
So, she plays basketball.
2. John will play tennis or he will play basketball.
John will play tennis.
So, John will not play basketball.
3. You play in the National Basketball Association
only if you are over three feet tall.
Bill is over three feet tall.
So, Bill plays in the National Basketball
Association.

4. Any creature with a kidney has a heart.

Not every creature has a heart.
Hence, not every creative has a kidney.
5. Everybody loves someone.
So, someone is loved by everyone.

6. There is evil in the world.

If there were a God, there would be no evil.
Therefore, there is no God.
Answer
Consider the following example:

P1: All pigs can fly.

P2: Anything that can fly can swim.
C: So all pigs can swim.

Is this argument Valid?

This example tells us:
The premises and the conclusion of a _________
argument can all be false.
Consider another example:
P1: All pigs are purple in colour.
P2: Anything that is purple is an animal.
C: So all pigs are animals.

It is possible for a valid argument to

have a true conclusion even when all
its premises are false.
Validity
 By definition, a valid deductive argument is one
where the conclusion must be true if all the
premises are true. All deductive arguments that
do not meet this standard are called invalid
arguments. It is our responsibility to avoid giving
invalid arguments and to filter out invalid
arguments from what we read. In other words,
invalid arguments are trash.
 Also note that a deductive argument is either
valid or invalid. There is nothing in between.
67
Example of an invalid deductive
argument
 If Newton’s physics and requisite background
assumptions are true, then a comet will appear
in Dec 1758. (pq)
 A comet did appear in Dec 1758. (q)
 Therefore, Newton’s physics is true. (∴p)

Confirming the consequent (q), rather than the

antecedent (p), is invalid as there could be other
reasons why the consequent did or did not occur.
確認 後件 ( q) ⽽ 不是 前件 ( p) 是 無效 的， 因為 可能 有 其他 原因 導致 後件 發⽣ 或 未 發⽣。
Truth, falsity, and deductive
validity
 Give an example, if possible, for each box in the
following diagram.
 If it is not possible, explain why.

* Refer to exercise
Premises Conclusion Valid Invalid

Ture True 1 2

At least one True 3 4

false
True False 5 6

At least one False 7 8

false
 Ifthe premises of a deductive argument are
true, the conclusion is always true.

 What about the actual truth of the premises

and the conclusion?
all “YES”  This is a “_________
 If
argument”
Soundness
 It should be obvious by now that validity is
about the logical connection between the
premises and the conclusion. When we are
told that an argument is valid, this is not enough
to tell us anything about the actual truth or
falsity of the premises or the conclusion.
 We know that there is a logical connection
between them, that the premises entail the
conclusion.
 So even if we are given a valid argument, we still
need to be careful before accepting the
conclusion, since a valid argument might
contain a false conclusion.
 What we need to check further is of course
whether the premises are true.
 If an argument is valid, and all the premises
are true, its conclusion must also be true.
Then it is called a ____________________.
 By definition, it is impossible for a valid argument
to have true premises and a false conclusion in
the same situation.
Video watching
 [Link]
annotation_2834598655&feature=iv&src_vid=pC
Gnyaa5E5g&v=3P0fUHUaZcs#t=7s
Example of a valid, unsound,
deductive argument
 If you don’t have agriculture, you cannot develop
a civilization. (True)
 Ancient South American Indians did not have
agriculture. (this premise is False)
 Therefore, they could not have developed a
civilization. (Not necessarily true)

If one or other of the premises is false, we do not

have to accept the conclusion.
 The argument is valid but “not sound”
Reasoning I:
 P1: An apple has mass and occupies space.
 P2: Anything that has mass and occupies space
is a matter.
 C: An apple is a matter.

 deductively _______ and _________

P1 and P2 are _______ statement.
Conclusion must be ________.
Reasoning II:
 P3: An apple does not have mass and does not
occupy space.
 P4: : Anything that has mass and occupies
space is a matter.
 C: An apple is not a matter.

 deductively _______ BUT _______

Because P3 is a ________ statement.
Conclusion is also ________.
Reasoning III:
 P5: An apple does not have mass and does not
occupy space.
 P6: : Apple contains sugar and mineral iron.
 C: Apple is good for our health.

  deductively _________ BUT ________.

P5 is a ______ statement while P6 is ______.
Conclusion is ______.
With/ without logical connection.
Inductive Strength
 For inductive argument, a good one is called
strong.
 By definition, a strong inductive argument is one
where the truth of the premises renders the truth
of the conclusion highly likely.
 Note that the definition is loose in comparison to
that of deductive validity: we cannot say exactly
what is highly likely.
 Also note that there is a spectrum of inductive
strengths: from very weak to very strong ones.

79
 P1: I jump from IFC top floor.
 C: I die.

 By common sense, this is a strong inductive

argument because if P1 is really true, my death
is a highly probable outcome.
 But if you know that I am Spiderman, then the
argument should be weak.

80
Contrast
 Now an important contrast between the two
types of argument emerges: deductive argument
is monotonic but not inductive argument.
 If an argument is monotonic and is valid, then no
matter how many premises we further add to it, it
will remain valid.
 On the contrary, we may change the inductive
strength of an inductive argument by adding
premises to it. In the previous example, if I add
the premise “I am Spiderman”, the argument
changes from being strong to weak. 81
Inductive reasoning
 Deductive arguments tell nothing if we know nothing
 Inductive arguments increase our knowledge, by
extending what we already know and by seeing
what can be inferred from existing knowledge.
 A common and useful form of argument in the
sciences, e.g. CSI, Crime Scene Investigation
 Take a collection of specific pieces of information,
the evidence at a crime scene, work out what the
most likely course of events and cause of the crime
Example of an inductive argument
 There are many instances where drinking too
much alcohol is linked to violence.
 Therefore alcohol makes you aggressive.

 Conclusion is not deduced but inferred from the

evidence presented in the premise.
 Conclusion is not a necessary consequence of the
premise.
 Alternative conclusion:
alcohol use should be restricted.
Evaluate these arguments and see if
they are strong or weak.
A. The weather is unstable at this time of the year and
we have had a few days of sunshine. It is likely to
rain this weekend.
B. I have yet to meet one person who knows anything
about food irradiation. From this I conclude that on
one is aware of the benefits of nuclear technology.
C. The sun has risen everyday for as long as history
has been recorded. The sun will continue to rise
everyday.
D. Nicotine is an effective pesticide because it is
sprayed on the leaves of a plant the plant
resists attack by insects.
E. Four percent of all cereals contain peanuts.
Tom has an allergy to nuts.
Tom will have an allergic reaction if he eats
cereals.
Argument A
Prediction is based on past events. Assumption is
that because things occurred in the past, then they
will occur the same way in the future. Besides, we
know that weather patterns are not predicted in this
way.
 this argument is not very strong.
Argument C similar to A. There is no guarantee that
the sun will continue to rise. So even though the
conclusion may be highly probable, it doesn’t mean
the reason offered is the most convincing.
Argument B
An example of sweeping generalization, where the
conclusion claims more than the evidence
warrants. How many people has the writer
encountered?
Argument D
Is a generalization but….seems to be a greater
degree of likelihood based on the evidence.
Argument E
Use to argue that Tom will have a reaction. We
have to judge how likely the claim is.
The likelihood of a reaction is probably too low to
warrant the strength of the conclusion.
Good Argument
 In the academic contexts and in real life
situations, what is a good argument?
 If the argument is _________, the argument is
good only if it is ________. They have true
premises. Such arguments are called ______.
 If an argument is _______, yet its conclusion
is false. Because at least one of its premises
must be ______, the argument, though valid,
is __________.
 If the argument is ________, the argument is
good only if it is __________. 89
Fallacy
 When limited evidence is used to justify a claim
that is not warranted from the evidence, the
argument is weak using poor inductive
reasoning.
 This refers to fallacy.
 E.g. All Fords are rubbish because the one I
bought broke down.
Example: Fallacy of composition
 This wheel is made of rubber, therefore the
vehicle to which it is a part is also made of
rubber.
 In chemistry and materials science, a single type
of atom may form allotropes with different
physical properties from each other, and from
their individual constituent atoms, such as
diamond and graphite each consisting of carbon
atoms. What is true of a single carbon atom is
not true of a collection of carbon atoms
bonded into a material.
Improving an inductive argument requires the
addition of more or better supporting premises.

 E.g.
The new oral contraceptive drug Luvinol was
trialled by 100 women in Australia for 12 months.
None of the women complained of side-effects.
Therefore, it is safe for women to use this drug.

How do you think about this argument?

Is it strong or weak?
 The conclusion could be correct.
 The evidence to support it is weak
A stronger argument
The new oral contraceptive Luvinol, was used for a
period of twelve months by 5000 female volunteers,
Aged 18 – 40 years with no history of major health
problems. No ill effects were reported during the
trial period. Annual health checks for a further
period of five years found no observable health
problems among the trial group. This indicates that
the drug Luvinol could be a safe contraceptive for
healthy womean.
Point to note
 The conclusion or claim of any of the above
arguments may be true or turn out to be true.
 What counts is whether or not the evidence
presented as support or justification warrants
reaching that conclusion.
 The way to measure the strength or weakness of
the argument.
Limitation in reasoning
 Since mathematics and many branches of scientific
reasoning employ deductive arguments, we can safely
deal with valid arguments since we know that if they are
valid, we won’t change their validity by adding more
information to the original set of premises.
 On the other hand, those dealing with inductive
arguments need to be aware of the background
assumptions (in the previous example, it is normally
assumed that I am not Spiderman or Ironman, etc.). That
is why people often complain that inductive arguments
are rather messy and indeterminate.

96
Presentation of arguments
 2 methods (Method I and II) are used to
represent and formalize arguments.
 The simplest one is usually taught in reading
comprehension in primary school.
 First, label consecutively with numbers the
meaningful sentences of a passage. Then use
arrow to connect premises and conclusion.

97
Method I: Example
 Donald Trump is a billionaire. He is also a
Republican. That explain why he adopts a
conservative foreign policy. By adopting such a
policy, the trade deficit will be diminished soon.
 1 Donald Trump is a billionaire. 2 He is also a
Republican. That explain why 3 he adopts a
conservative foreign policy. By adopting such a
policy, 4 the trade deficit will be diminished soon.

98
 1 2


 4

99
 In the diagram, points 1 and 2 conjointly support
point 3 and 3 in turn directly supports the final
conclusion 4.
 If you use two separate arrows connecting 1 and
2 to 3, then you think that 1 or 2 itself is good
enough to support sub-conclusion 3.

How can you call the diagram in previous slide?

100
 [Link]

Argument mapping

An __________________ is a diagram that captures

the logical structure of a simple or complex
argument.
Present the following argument by an
argument map.

(1) Paris is in France, and (2) France is in

Europe. So obviously (3) Paris is in Europe.
Interpretation:
 The two premises are connected together before
linking to the conclusion.
 This merging of the links indicate that the two
premises, (1) & (2), are co-premises which work
together in a single argument to support the
conclusion.
 In other words, they do not provide independent
reasons for accepting the conclusion.
 Without one of the premises, the other premise
would fail to support the conclusion.
Is it an argument?
Identify the premises and the conclusion.
Present it by an argument map.

[1] Smoking is unhealthy, since [2] it can cause

cancer. Furthermore, [3] it also increases the
chance of heart attacks and strokes.
Premises:
________________________________;
________________________________.

Conclusion:
_____________________

Argument map
Interpretation:

 This diagram tells us that ____________

are independent reasons supporting ____.
 In other words, without [2], [3] would still
support [1], and without [3], [2] would still
support [1].
Another example:
A single reason giving rise to multiple conclusions.

[1] Gold is a metal. [2] So it conducts electricity.

[3] It also conducts heat.
Exercise:
Draw an argument map for the following argument.

[1] This computer can think. So [2] it is

conscious. Since [3] we should not kill any
conscious beings, [4] we should not switch it off.
Answer
True or False Exercises

1. A claim is what you use to state an opinion or a

belief.
2. Critical thinking consists in attacking other
people’s ideas.
3. Whether a passage contains an argument
depends on how long it is.
4. All arguments have a conclusion.
5. Statements, claims, and assertions are the
same thing.
Answer

True: _____________
False: ____________