1705137103

1705137104 · Association using arguments of similarity

1705137105

1705137106 思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132528]

1705137107 20.6 Discussion Questions for Chapter 20

1705137108

1705137109 · How can a principle be supported using an argument by analogy? Can you think of other ways to support a principle?

1705137110

1705137111 · Are the methods of combining claims using consequences significantly different from combining claims using principles?

1705137112

1705137113 · Are the ways of combining claims for a motion about value significantly different from combining claims about policy? If so, how?

1705137114

1705137115 思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132529]

1705137116 20.7 Exercise for Chapter 20

1705137117

1705137118 · Take any of the motions used earlier in the text. Construct at least one consequential argument for the motion and another against the motion. Then construct at least one principled argument for the motion and another against the motion. In each case, follow the describe, associate, evaluate pattern.

1705137119

1705137120

1705137121

1705137122

1705137123 思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132530]

1705137124 思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 Chapter 21The Quality of Arguments: Fallacies in Argumentation

1705137125

1705137126 Robert Trapp

1705137127

1705137128 Chapter Outline

1705137129

1705137130 21.1 Criteria for Logical Assessment of Arguments

1705137131

1705137132 21.2 Three Basic Fallacies

1705137133

1705137134 21.3 Summary

1705137135

1705137136 21.4 Terms and Concepts from Chapter 21

1705137137

1705137138 21.5 Discussion Questions for Chapter 21

1705137139

1705137140 21.6 Exercise for Chapter 21

1705137141

1705137142 Chapters 15 through 20 focused on the elements of argument, how those elements are structured to create arguments, and how various arguments can be combined into coherent patterns. Implicit in those discussions is the idea that some arguments are better than other arguments and that some arguments are of higher quality than other arguments. This chapter focuses directly on the quality of arguments and on the criteria that separate good arguments from poor ones.

1705137143

1705137144

1705137145

1705137146 This chapter concentrates on the logical criteria that separate good arguments from poor arguments. Logical criteria for assessing the strength of an argument are important, but they are only part of the story. Other extra-logical elements, such as the elegance of an argument, how well an argument is adapted to the audience, and the clarity and passion with which the argument is expressed, are also important parts of the quality of an argument. This chapter covers only the logical criteria for assessing argument quality. The other elements are discussed elsewhere in this book, particularly in Chapter 14 that focuses on how an argument is delivered. The concept known as “fallacies” is used to address the logical quality of arguments. Fallacies point to errors in evidence or reasoning, errors that weaken or undermine the strength of an argument. Different textbooks treat fallacies differently; some list a large number of fallacies and treat each of them independently. For many people, approaches are cumbersome and less than coherent. Philosophers Ralph H. Johnson and J. Anthony Blair devised a system of identifying fallacies that depends on three simple criteria for a good argument, and they define a fallacy as being any violation of those criteria. This chapter follows the approach taken by Johnson and Blair of identifying the three criteria for a good argument, then detailing specific fallacies that are related to each of those three criteria.

1705137147

1705137148 思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132531]

1705137149 21.1 Criteria for Logical Assessment of Arguments

1705137150

1705137151 Some who write about the logical assessment of arguments see argument quality as falling into the categories of either “adequate” or “inadequate.” For example, Professor Trudy Govier writes that:

1705137152

[ 上一页 ]  [ :1.705137103e+09 ]  [ 下一页 ]