| Analogies | Arguments from analogy rest on a comparison from which we infer a trait true of one of the terms of the comparison must also be true of the other term. These are of the form: A and B both have characteristics p, q, and r. B has characteristic s as well; therefore A must also have characteristic s. For example, Kobe and Tayshaun are both basketball players, tall, talented, and have played in an NBA championship game. Kobe is involved in a lawsuit, so Tayshaun must be involved in a lawsuit too.
|
 |
|
|
| Analysis | Extracting key ideas, pulling out hidden assumptions, setting out the structure of arguments and evaluating arguments, policies, plans, and decision-making are important aspects of analysis.
|
|
|
|
| Approach | Style of delivery, focus, and structure are all aspects of the approach taken to a topic. The frame of reference or point of view should also be considered an aspect of the approach taken.
|
|
|
|
| Argument | Evidence (premises) given in support of a thesis (conclusion). The two components of an argument are the premises and the conclusion.
|
|
|
|
| Assumed neutrality or objectivity | In an expository essay, ideas and information are presented in as objective or neutral a manner as possible.. In assumed neutrality, the author tries to present the material in as unbiased and balanced a manner as possible.
|
|
|
|
| Biased statistics | One of the fallacies of presumption. If the studies fail to be diverse enough, the result may be biased statistics (fallacious reasoning that occurs when a sample study is not diverse enough and, thus, fails to be representative).
|
|
|
|
| Cause and Effect Reasoning | Cause and effect reasoning occurs when someone asserts that something either causes or is an effect of something else. A causal claim may have merit, but it is crucial that alternative causes be dismissed first. Once they can be eliminated, a causal claim has more force. The presence of causal claims in the premises makes the argument inductive, since the conclusion cannot follow with certainty.
|
|
|
|
| Circumstantial Evidence | This is evidence which indirectly points to a conclusion for which an alternative explanation is unlikely--though possible. This occurs when we have no hard evidence one way or the other, but the evidence points to the one conclusion. Circumstantial evidence works together in support of a particular conclusion that, in the absence of any reasonable alternative, seems highly likely. What gives circumstantial evidence its weight is the lack of an alternative explanation for the pieces in the puzzle.
|
|
|
|
| Cogency | A cogent argument is well reasoned and clearly structured so we can follow the argument, seeing how the evidence lays the foundation for the conclusion.
|
|
|
|
| Conditional Claims | A proposition expressed in the form of "If A then B," "A if B," "Only if A then B," and "A only if B." These are also known as hypothetical claims. For instance, "If the snow melts, we won't be able to ski."
|
|
|
|
| Context | The context is the setting in which an idea is expressed (e.g., the paragraph, the chapter, the book). The social context is the particular time and place events, people, ideas, etc. are situated. Issues and problems do not exist in a vacuum, but are embedded in people's lives and usually take place within a certain location and time frame.
|
|
|
|
| Corroborating evidence | When the evidence (set of premises) poses no clear conflicts or contradictions if we assume it is actually true we have corroborating evidence. With corroborating evidence it is gets harder to attack a case, because the foundation gains more strength.
|
|
|
|
| Creative expression | This is a creative work, such as a poem, play, song, or short story, where artistic means are used to explore a topic or present a point of view. We would not treat it as an argument per se, but we can still undertake an artistic, literary, film, or textual analysis. Determining the focus of an artwork may require a multi-layered approach,
|
|
|
|
| Credible Sources | These are sources considered to be legitimate, authentic, reliable, genuine, respectable. Jurors (and judges!) are regularly put in the position of having to assess the credibility of expert witnesses. Sizing up credibility is not always easy, which may account for the role of gut reaction on the part of some jurors.
|
|
|
|
| Fact | Something known to be true--as a thing that has existed, or an event, or a concept that can be proved or is known to have happened. If a claim of fact were assumed to be false it would conflict with evidence known to be true. This would create a contradiction, which means the claim of fact must actually be true. Facts and factual claims do not permit a rival conclusion--any rival conclusion simply would lack support.
|
|
|
|
| Hasty generalization | One of the fallacies of Presumption. It occurs when a sample study is insufficient in terms of size, leading to an incorrect conclusion being drawn).
|
|
|
|
| Independent Evidence | When one piece of evidence is sufficient in and of itself, we would say that that piece independently, or singly, establishes the conclusion.
|
|
|
|
| Interdependent evidence | With interdependent premises, the evidence operates as a package deal. This is strongest when the evidence works together like interlocking pieces, holding up the conclusion.
|
|
|
|
| Scope of a Claim | This is what a proposition is meant to cover. "All" means more than "some" and vague generalities mean less than specific, detailed claims. The significance of scope also applies to the use of "always" versus "frequently" or "often." "Often" is weaker than "always," for its scope is more limited. This means that a claim using "often" instead of "always" or "never" has less weight.
|
|
|
|
| Speculation | Speculation is a form of guesswork. We normally use the term speculation to apply to either (1) hypotheses that have little, if any, evidence to back them up or (2) unsupported claims. When people speculate, they are stating a claim without sufficient evidence to be certain they are right. Speculation is not necessarily true; in fact it could be false and not conflict with known evidence or theoretical understanding.
|
|
|
|
| Statistical Evidence | Evidence that relies on statistical studies. The use of statistical evidence makes the argument inductive. The use of statistics can be very effective, particularly when the studies are current. Besides the date of the study, the key concerns in assessing statistical studies are size and diversity. The sample size should be adequate and have sufficient diversity: the group sampled needs to be representative of the target population being studied.
|
|
|
|
| Thesis | The thesis is the position being argued by an author. In an argument it functions as the conclusion for which the premises (evidence) are offered as support.
|
|
|
|
| Value Claims | Assertions involving a judgment of morality, religion, personal taste, or aesthetic evaluation. Value claims may be used as evidence, but should be handled carefully.
|