Arguments Are Support

While being open-minded and playing “the believing game” is a great starting place whenever you’re having a discussion, the remainder of the webtext will focus on what Peter Elbow calls “the doubting game.” To filter through all the ideas presented to you and decide what to believe, it’s important to turn a skeptical eye to every argument you encounter.

The first step is to understand exactly what makes up an argument. To say that something is true is to make a claim. But to give reasons to believe that it is true is to make an argument. Thus all arguments consist of at least two parts:

1. premise – one or more reasons or pieces of evidence to support the claim

2. conclusion – the claim being supported

Arguments make the process of thinking visible. The logical leap from the premises to the conclusion is known as an inference. Whenever you draw a conclusion based on a piece of information, such as seeing a threateningly dark sky and deciding that there’s a good chance of rain, you’re making an inference. When these inferences are articulated with premises and conclusions, they make an argument.

Recognizing Arguments

Not every piece of text or spoken speech you encounter is necessarily an argument. Unless it has both premises and a conclusion, it’s not an argument.

If no support is offered, it’s not an argument. It might be true. It might be a fact. It might be an opinion. But if there are no reasons to back it up, it’s not an argument. Consider the following passage:

People say I’m angry. I am. I’m angry that our president started an unnecessary war. I’m upset that our military got away with torturing people. I’m mad that an insurance company sold policies that my government had to cover, and they’re still open. I’m upset that companies like Countrywide and Washington Mutual collapsed the housing market. I’m totally disgusted in Congress. 1

This could be the beginning of an argument—maybe the author goes on to support his opinions with reasons and evidence. But as it stands, this piece of text is merely a list of assertions of belief.

Narratives are also not arguments:

I remember being paid $5.75 an hour at my first job as a host at Hobee’s, a brunch restaurant in the East Bay town of Fremont where I grew up. The dismal pay rate felt like a significant amount of money at the time, but then again it was the year 2000, I was living with my parents, and I was only 14. … It’s hard to imagine how my coworkers at Hobee’s were surviving on $5.75 an hour all those years ago, many of them with families to support. 2

The text above is also not an argument. The writer is reflecting upon his memories, and his feelings about his memories, but because he doesn’t make any definitive claim, it’s not an argument.

Finding Premises and Conclusions

When you’re spelling out arguments, the standard form is to list the premises first, and then state the conclusion that the premises lead to. But arguments in real life are often not as tidy. The ability to tease out the premises and conclusion in a body of text is a key part of analyzing arguments—and making sure that what you’re reading is an argument in the first place.

An important first step is to find the conclusions. Sometimes speakers or writers will provide clues about what their conclusions are with indicator words and phrases such as:

· Therefore…

· So…

· Consequently…

· Hence…

· Which shows that…

· It follows that…

But not all arguers use these phrases to mark their conclusion (and not every instance of these phrases means that it’s a conclusion!). Furthermore, while it’s standard practice to map out arguments by listing the premises first and ending with the conclusion they lead to, not all arguments in real life end on the concluding proposition. For instance, consider the following argument:

Debtors’ prisons impose devastating human costs. They lead to coercive debt collection, forcing poor people to forgo the basic necessities of life in order to avoid arrest and jailing. Debtors’ prisons waste taxpayer money and resources by jailing people who may never be able to pay their debts. This imposes direct costs on the government and further destabilizes the lives of poor people struggling to pay their debts and leave the criminal justice system behind. And most troubling, debtors’ prisons create a racially-skewed, two-tiered system of justice in which the poor receive harsher, longer punishments for committing the same crimes as the rich, simply because they are poor. 3

Which can be broken down as follows:

Premise: Debtors’ prisons lead to coercive debt collection. Premise: Debtors’ prisons waste taxpayer money and resources by jailing people who may never be able to pay their debts. Premise: Debtors’ prisons create a racially-skewed, two-tiered system of justice in which the poor receive harsher, longer punishments for committing the same crimes as the rich, simply because they are poor. Conclusion: Debtors’ prisons impose devastating human costs.

Note that here the conclusion appears at the beginning of the paragraph, and it is not surrounded by any recognizable indicator words, but it is still the main claim that the author uses the propositions that follow to support.

If you have trouble finding the conclusion, a good place to start is to ask yourself questions like:

· What’s the point?

· About what is the writer trying to convince me?

· What is the writer’s purpose for writing this?

Once you have a good idea about what the conclusion is, you’ll want to find the premises used to support the conclusion. Premises can be identified using questions like:

· How is this claim supported?

· What reasons does the speaker or writer give for why I should believe this?

Extended Arguments

Some arguments you encounter will be simple, with a small number of premises leading up to a single, clearly stated conclusion.

“You should hire Kelsey for the job. She has more relevant experience than any of the other candidates.”

Premise: Kelsey has more relevant experience than any of the other candidates. Conclusion: Therefore, Kelsey should be hired for the job.

Other arguments may have far more premises supporting their conclusions. Or they may contain sub-arguments, which are subordinate arguments inside the main argument that support the main conclusion. This means that one claim might simultaneously be the conclusion of a sub-argument and the premise of the main argument. These arguments that contain sub-arguments are called extended arguments. You will frequently encounter them when you read editorials, reviews, essays, blog posts, etc., or when you’re writing a paper of your own.

Think back to the Pro-Con list ( “Are Social Networking Sites Good for Our Society?”) that you looked at in Practice: Pride. Each numbered point on the Pro side supported the conclusion that social networking sites are good for society.

Main Argument

Premise: Social networking sites spread information faster than any other media. Premise: Law enforcement uses social networking sites to catch and prosecute criminals. Premise: Social networking sites help students do better at school. (and so on) Conclusion: Social networking sites are good for our society.

However, notice how each of the points on the list contains an explanation supporting it. To translate this into argument terms, this means that the statement “Social networking sites help students do better in school” functions as both a premise in the main argument “Social networking sites are good for society” as well as the conclusion in a sub-argument.

Sub-Argument

Premise: 59 percent of students with access to the Internet report that they use social networking sites to discuss educational topics. Premise: After George Middle School in Portland, OR introduced a social media program to engage students, grades went up by 50 percent, chronic absenteeism went down by 33 percent, and 20 percent of students school-wide voluntarily completed extra-credit assignments. Conclusion: Social networking sites help students do better at school.

To put it all together, this particular sub-argument fits inside the main argument like this:

Extended Argument

Premise: Social networking sites spread information faster than any other media. Premise: Law enforcement uses social networking sites to catch and prosecute criminals. Premise: Social networking sites help students do better at school.

Premise: 59 percent of students with access to the Internet report that they use social networking sites to discuss educational topics. Premise: After George Middle School in Portland, OR introduced a social media program to engage students, grades went up by 50 percent, chronic absenteeism went down by 33 percent, and 20 percent of students school-wide voluntarily completed extra-credit assignments. Conclusion: Social networking sites help students do better at school.

Conclusion: Social networking sites are good for our society.

Answer the following questions about the material above.

Which of the following qualifies as a complete argument with both a premise and a conclusion?

· “Clients and colleagues alike are complaining about the strong perfume you wear in the office, so you should switch brands.”

· “The rise of reality TV has completely destroyed the integrity of the sitcom.”

· “Studies show that eating kale is great for cardiovascular support.”

· “In the next election, I’m going to vote Democrat. I’m going to convince all my friends to vote for Democrats too.”

Save

A complex argument that contains sub-arguments supporting the premises of the main argument is which of the following?

· a claim

· an extended argument

· a simple argument

· a conclusion

Save

Analyze the argument contained in the excerpt below, and then answer the next two questions.

Voters in New Jersey should adopt a constitutional amendment that raises the minimum wage to $8.25 an hour starting on Jan. 1. If it is approved, more than 400,000 people now working at or near minimum wage could benefit…. Business leaders say, as they often do, that such increases would cost jobs. But a recent study by New Jersey Policy Perspective estimated that because the working poor spend virtually every extra dollar they earn, the increase in pay would add $175 million to the economy in 2014, most of it in New Jersey.4

Identify at least one premise from the argument above.

 

No response saved yet. Save Draft Submit ?

Identify the conclusion from the argument above.

 

No response saved yet. Save Draft Submit ?

Is the following passage an argument? Explain your answer.

 

Video gaming (playing video games) has become a popular activity for people of all ages. Many children and adolescents spend large amounts of time playing them. Video gaming is a multibillion-dollar industry bringing in more money than movies and DVDs. Video games have become very sophisticated and realistic. Some games connect to the Internet, which can allow children and adolescents to play online with unknown adults and peers.5

 

No response saved yet. Save Draft Submit ?

Is the following passage an argument? Explain your answer.

 

More than 50 percent of Europeans speak more than one language. By contrast, only about 18 percent of Americans speak a language other than English. Therefore, learning a second (or third) language is a tangible way you can distinguish yourself in our global business world. 6

 

No response saved yet. Save Draft Submit ?

1 Larry Lugar, “Letter: An Angry Man”, Idaho Statesman, August 13, 2014.

Jorge Rosales, 2″Why I Support Measure FF to Raise the Minimum Wage”, Oakland North, October 28, 2014.

3″Ending Modern-Day Debtors’ Prisons”, American Civil Liberties Union.

4″Add a Dollar an Hour in New Jersey”, New York Times, November 3, 2013.

5″Children and Video Games: Playing with Violence”, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, March 2011.

Tricia Drevets, 6″Why You Should Learn A Foreign Language”, ValueWalk, March 27, 2014.

 

 

Arguments / 3.2 Practice: Arguments are Support Questions: 0 of 5 complete (0%) | 0 of 3 correct (0%)

Practice: Arguments are Support

Does the Existing Drinking Age Help or Harm?

There are few things more tragic than the avoidable death of a young person, and unfortunately alcohol-related fatalities claim many young lives every year. While everyone wants to reduce these deaths, controversy surrounds the question of whether the best way to do so is by keeping the drinking age at 21 or reducing it back to 18. This segment from 60 Minutes features a variety of perspectives on this issue, including those of John McCardell, the former president of Middlebury College, and Chuck Hurley, the executive director of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD). As you watch the video, pay attention to the arguments presented by both sides and the premises they use to support their conclusions.

Watch the following video, and then answer the questions below.