This document provides an overview of a course on how to reason and argue effectively. The course will teach students how to analyze, evaluate, and avoid logical fallacies in arguments. It will cover deductive and inductive reasoning. Students will learn how to identify the components of an argument, including premises and conclusions. They will also learn techniques for structuring arguments, dealing with skepticism, and carefully analyzing arguments. The goal is for students to learn practical skills for spotting and constructing good arguments.

1. Think Again: How to
Reason and Argue
Complete course slides

2. How to Spot an Argument
Week 1

3. Lecture List
1-1: Why Arguments Matter
1-2: What is an Argument?
1-3: What Arguments are Used For - Justification
1-4: What Else Are Arguments Used For - Explanation
1-5: What Are Arguments Made Of - Language
1-6: Meaning
1-7: Linguistic Acts
1-8: Speech Acts
1-9: Conversation Acts

4. This Course
- Will address practical issues and theoretical
questions.
- We will focus on reason
- Approach arguments by way of reason
-Learn to spot and avoid bad arguments

5. What We Will Learn
1. How to Analyze Arguments
2. How to evaluate Deductive Arguments
3. How to evaluate Inductive Arguments
4. How to avoid Fallacies

6. What arguments are not
- Arguments are not fights.
- You cannot win an argument by abuse
- Complaints

7. Definition of Argument
(a) A series of sentences, statements, or
propositions
(b) where some are the premises
(c) and one is the conclustion
(d) Where the premises are intended to give a
reason for the conclusion

8. Purpose for Arguments
Persuading - making people believe or do
something that they would not otherwise
believe or do
- Tries to convince, reasons may be good or bad
Justifying - showing someone a reason to
believe a conclusion
- Tries to give good reasons

9. Questions to Ask
1. Is the arguer trying to change someone's
mind?
-If so, the purpose is persuasion
2. Is the arguer trying to give some kind of
reason to believe something?
-If so, the purpose is justification

10. Arguments sometimes
Explain
Explaining IS An attempt to fit a particular
phenomenon int a general pattern in order to
increase understanding and remove
bewilderment or surprise.
Explanation is NOT: Persuasion, justification,
generalization, or prediction

11. Kinds of explanations
1. Causal - why something happened
2. Teleological - the purpose or goal of
something
3. Formal - the form of something as an
explanation
4. Material - what something is made out of

12. Explanation in Standard
Form
General principles or laws
Initial conditions _
.'. Phenomenon to be explained

13. Language Is
1. Important - Without language it would be difficult to
communicate
2. Conventional - We use language in certain patterns
and in certain ways to convey the same idea
3. Representational - We assign words to objects and
it becomes a convention, suddenly changing the name of
the object does not change its nature
4. Social - Language is shared and that is why we follow
conventions

14. Language Operates Under
Rules:
Semantics: meanings of words
Physical Production: volume, pronunciation, and so
on
Structural Combination: spelling and grammar
Etiquette

15. Meaning of Language
Meaning is use.
-The meaning of the language is given by the
way those words are used in normal situations
by competent speakers of the language.
- Use is diverse.

16. Levels of Language
1. Linguistic
2. Speech Acts
3. Conversational

17. Linguistic Act:
The production of a meaningful
utterance.
Ex: It's easy!
-You have to use words
-The words have to make sense
-It has to be ordered correctly and grammatically correct
Garden Path Sentences: do not seem correct at first, but
if it is separated correctly it is a sentence

18. Speech Acts
- "You're nothing 'til you say so because it's the
saying so that makes you so. "
-To test if it is a speech act, perform the
"thereby test"
- Arguing is a speech act.

19. The Thereby Test
If I say, "I ___" in the appropriate
circumstances then I thereby ___.
-when you can fill in the blank with a verb and the verb
makes sense, then the verb names a speech act
Ex: If I say, "I apologize," I thereby apologize.
Formula takes you from Words ---> to World
-Only applies in proper circumstances. Ex: you cannot walk up to
two strangers and pronounce them husband and wife

20. Conversational Acts
Is the bringing about of the intended effect,
which is the standard effect for the kind of
speech act that the speaker is performing.
-The conversational act does not occur
when the effect does not occur.
-Conversational act rules are conversational maxims.

21. Conversational Maxims
Quantity: Don't say too much or too little
Quality: Don't say what you don't believe or
what you have no reason to believe.
Relevance: Be relevant
Manner: Be brief. Be orderly. Avoid obscurity.
Avoid ambiguity.

22. How to Untangle an
Argument
Week 2

23. Lecture List
2-1: Argument Markers
2-2: Standard Form
2-3: A Problem for Arguments
2-4: Assuring
2-5: Guarding
2-6: Discounting
2-7: Evaluation
2-8: Close Analysis
2-9: More Close Analysis
2-10: Even More Close Analysis

24. Argument Makers
The language of arguments
I am tall, and I am good at sports. = I am good
at sports, and I am good at sports.
I am tall, so I am good at sports. =/= I am good
at sports, so I am tall.

25. Conclusion Markers
-Indicate that the sentence right after them is a
conclusion.
● Therefore
● Thus
● Hence
● Accordingly
● So (though it is not always)

26. Premise (or Reason) Markers
- Indicate is that the sentence after them is a
reason, or a premise, NOT a conclusion.
● Because
● For
● As
● For the reason that
● And the reason why
● Since (though it is not always)

27. Standard form
- The word order does not always tell us the
order of an argument.
(1) Premise
(1) Premis
-------------------
.'. (3) Conclusion

28. The problem of the skeptical
regress
Ways around
1. Start with a premise that is unjustified
2. Have an argument with a circular structure
3. Use an infinite chain of arguments

29. 1. Unjustified Premise
- If your argument just guesses at the premise it
cannot justify you in believing the conclusion
- If you start with an unjustified premise you
can "prove" anything, even things that are
obviously false

30. 2. Circular structure
EX: There is life on Mars, therefore, there is life on Mars.
- If you are not justified in believing the
argument, you are not justified in beliving the
conclusion.
-The same argument can be used either way
and is therefore invalid(ther is life or there is no
life on mars)

31. 3. Infinite chain of arguments
Ex: There are at least three bacteria on mars, therefore
there are at least two bacteria on Mars, therefore there is
life on Mars.
- And infinite chain of arguments would allow
you to "prove" the conclusion even if the
premise has no independent justification

32. Argument Moves
-Tricks for Dealing with Skeptical
Regress
1. Assure the audience
(Cite an authority, find shared assumptions)
2. Discount objections
3. Guard your claim
(It is probably right, rather than definitely)

33. Types of Assurances
1. Authoritative - cites an authority that the
audience shares as an authority
1. Reflexive - citing yourself
1. Abusive - - conditional abuse - abuse anyone who
disagrees with them, so their abuse will apply to you if
you disagree with them (Ex: You'd have to be stupid to
disagree about this)
-appeal to common sense

34. Benefits of Assurances
1. They save you time
2. They help you avoid the skeptical regress

35. Tricks with Assurances
1. Citations of untrustworthy authorities
2. Distractions
- "Thats obvious"
- "It's certain"
- "I'm sure"
3. Dropping assurances
-"He says" transfers into "There are"

36. We Want an Assurance When
1. Somebody might question it
2. The audience accepts the authority
3. It would be too much trouble to cite all of the
evidence

37. Assurances Are not
Appropriate When
1. Nobody would question the claim
2. Authority is not trustworthy
3. You are easily able to give full explanation

38. Guarding
- Involves making your premises weaker so that
it is harder to object to them.

39. Three Ways to Guard
1. Extent -
(All > Most >some)
2. Probability -
(Certain > Likely > Might have)
3. Mental
(Know > Believe > Inclined to believe)

40. When someone is guarding,
ask:
1. Why did they put in the guard?
2. Have they weakened the premise so much
that the conclusion no longer follows?

41. Discounting
- Citing a possible criticism in order to reject it
or counter it
(Ex: Well the ring is expensive, but it is beautiful)
- "But" indicates the sentence after is more
important than the one before
Other discounting words:
-Although, Even if, Still, Nevertheless, Nonetheless,
Whereas, Even though, However

42. Functions of Discounting
Terms
1. They assert two claims
2. They contrast two claims
3. They emphasize one of the claims

43. Tricks of Discounting
1. Trick of Discounting Straw People - The
arguer discounts easy objections to make
people overlook the more difficult objections
2.Arguers can combine the trick of Discounting
Straw People with misuses of guarding (like "all
rather than "most) and assuring

44. RULE of Thumb
Think about the objections that the
arguer is NOT considering.

45. Evaluation
Evaluative language - positive or negative
language that judges the worth of something
Yay, Duke! =/= Duke is a good team.

46. Two Tricks
1. When we call something "good," we don't
specify what the standards are.
- This makes our claim more defensible since
our standards cannot be questioned if they are
not presented.
2. Agreeing to premises without specifing the
"why" so everyone can use their own standards.

47. Levels of Evaluation
1. General - Good or bad, Should or should not, Right or
wrong, etc.
2. Specific - Beautiful or ugly, Cruel or kind, Cowardly or
Brave (can only apply to a small range of things, A soldier
can be brave or cowardly, a chair cannot)

48. Why are these words
evaluative?
What makes them evaluative is their
connection to what is good or bad.
We will call language "evaluative" only when it
is only and literally evaluative.
-Tricky examples: combining positive and negative
evaluative words
(+)Good = Good(+)
(+)Pretty (+)good = less than good (-)
(+)Pretty (-)Darn (+) Good = surprisingly good (+)

49. Slanting
- using evaluative terms without having reasons
to do so
Slanting signals weaknesses in the arguments.

50. Close Analysis
- To go through an argument and mark the
argument markers and terms in order to
analyze the argument
Practice! Practice! Practice!

51. Close Analysis
Reason Marker = R (or P)
Conclusion Marker = C
Assuring Term = A
Guarding Term = G
Discounting Term = D
Positive Evaluation Term = E+
Negative Evaluation Term = E-

52. How to Reconstruct an
Argument
Week 3

53. Lecture List
3-1: Validity
3-2: Soundness
3-3: Get down to Basics
3-4: Sharpen Edges
3-5: Organize Parts
3-6: Fill in Gaps and Conclude
3-1: An Example of Reconstruction

54. Vices in Arguments
1. One or more premises is/are FALSE
2. The premises do not provide a good
REASON for the conclusion

55. Virtues in Arguments
-Validity
- Soundness

56. Deductive Argument
: the conclusion should follow from the
premises.
A deductive argument is supposed to be valid.

57. Validity
An argument VALID if and only if it is not
1. possible that both all of its premises are true
and its conclusion is false.
2. whenever its conclusion is false, at least one
premise must be false.
-Validity depends on what is possible.

58. Validity is NOT
1. A valid argument is not necessarily good
2. Validity does not depend on whether the
premises and the conclusion are actually true.

59. Kinds of Arguments
True Conclusion False Conclusion
True Premises Some Valid, Some
Not
ALL INVALID
A False Premise Some Valid, Some
Not
Some Valid, Some
Not

60. Soundness
An argument is SOUND if and only if
1. All of its premises are true, and
2. it is valid

61. Kind of Arguments
Premises_Conclusion Valid__Not
Valid
True True
Sound Not Sound
True False
Impossible Not Sound
False True Not Sound
Not Sound
False False Not
Sound Not Sound

62. Unsound Arguments
An Argument is unsound if:
1. The argument is invalid
2. It has a false premise
- If a deductive argument is not sound, it is not
a good argument
- If an argument is invalid, it is unsound

63. Reconstruction Goals & Steps Pt. 1
Goal: The goal of reconstruction is to put an argument in a
form in which we can easily and accurately assess it in as
fair a manner as possible.
STAGE I: Close Analysis
Step 1 - Do a close analysis
STAGE II : Get Down to Basics
Step 2 - Remove all excess verbiage
Step 3 - List all explicit premises and conclusion in
_______standard form
STAGE III: Sharpen Edges
Step 4 - Clarify where needed.

64. Reconstruction Steps Pt. 2
STAGE IV: Organize Parts
Step 6 - Divide the argument into sub-arguments,
and _______arrange them in order.
STAGE V: Fill In Gaps
Step 7 - Assess whether each argument is valid.
Step 8 - Ass suppresses premises where needed
Step 9 - Check each premise for truth.
Step 10 - Qualify premises to make them true where
________needed if possible.
STAGE VI: Assess The Argument
Step 11 - Conclude.

65. Excess Verbiage
- Repetition
- Road Markers 6:00: helpful for keeping track of an
argument, but they do not add anything to the argument
itself.
- Tangents: a completely different or divergent course
of veribiage, Red Herring: Something that draws
attention away from the central issue.
- Examples

66. Sharpen Edges
- We should seek adequate precision and
adequate clarity.
- Clarify premises by breaking them into
smaller parts when this does not distort the
premises.

67. Types of Structures
1. Linear structure
2. Branching Stucture
3. Joint Structure
4. Some combination thereof

68. The Method
1. Identify and number the premises and
conclusion.
2. When the premises work together, put a plus
sign between them and draw a line under them.
3. Draw arrows from reasons to claims that
they are reasons for.
4. Rearrange as necessary

69. Linear Structure
One premise gives a reason for a conclusion,
and that conclusion is then a premise for
another conclusion.
1.
2.
3.

70. Branching Structure
-The premises provide independent support for
the conclusion.
1
1*
2

71. Joint Structure
- The premises work together to provide
support for the conclusion, and neither premise
alone is sufficient for_the conclusion.
1. +
2.
3.

72. Reasons to Fill in Suppressed
Premises
1. To examine and assess the assumptions ot
the argument
2. To understand the argument better

73. Goals of Filling In
Suppressed Premises
1. To trace the full path of the arguer's
reasoning
2. To find out if there are any missteps in the
argument

74. Types of Suppressed Premises
1. Factual
2. Moral
3. Norm - Based
4. Linguistic

75. Conclude
STAGE VI: Assess The Argument
Step 11 - Conclude.
11.1 If you find a sound reconstruction, accept
the conclusion, since it must be true.
11.2 If you try hard enough, but fail to find a
sound reconstruction, then it is often
reasonable to conclude that the argument is not
sound.

76. Propositional Logic and
Truth Tables
Week 4

77. Lecture List
4-1: Intro to Deductive Arguments
4-2: Propositions & Propositional Connectives
4-3: Truth Functional connectives Conjunction
4-4: Truth Functional Connectives Disjunction
4-5: Propositional Logic Negation
4-6: Propositional Logic Conditionals

78. Deductive argument - An argument that is
presented as valid. (See slide 56)

79. Proposition and
Propositional Connective
Proposition - The kind of thing that can be
true or false and that can serve as the premise
or the conclusion of an argument.
Propositional Connective - a phrase that
connects to a proposition in order to express
another proposition.

81. Categorical Logic and
Syllogisms
Week 5

82. Lecture List
5-1: Intro to Categorical Logic
5-2: Syllogisms

83. Inductive Arguments
Week 6

84. Lecture List
6-1: What is Induction?
6-2: Generalizations from Samples
6-3: When are Generalizations Strong?
6-4: Applying Generalizations
6-5: Inference to the Best Explanation
6-6: Which Explanation is best?
6-7: Arguments from Analogy