Strong And Weak Arguments

Strong And Weak Arguments

Introduction:

Some examinations consist of question based on identifying strong and weak arguments.In these questions a proposal followed by two arguments is given.One has to examine the arguments in the context of given proposal so as to determine their strength.The statements given in these questions,normally,are of interrogative nature.

Before discussing the methodology of solving the question,let us discuss the two important concepts,"Proposal" and "Argument".

Proposal:

Most of the question are based on a "Proposal".A Proposal,here,means a course of action to be taken up.

Example:

(1) Should liquor be banned?
(2) Should wild life be preserved?

Argument:

A proposal is followed by two arguments.An argument maybe in favor of or against the proposal.One has to cheek the strength of the arguments.This cannot be misconstrued as considering only favorable arguments.it is irrelevant whether an argument is favorable or adverse to a proposal.Both favorable and adverse arguments are considered provided both of them are strong enough in their own ways.

The supporting argument normally bases its support on a positive result or a positive feature, that would follow, on implementation the course of action proposed in the statement. Similarly, the opposing argument takes its support on the basis of a negative result or a negative feature that (it thinks) follows if the proposed course of action is implemented.

Strength of an argument: An argument is considered to be strong, if it provides a valid and directly related reason either in favor of or against the proposal made.

While considering the arguments, one has to adhere to the following norms:

(1) The argument is to be considered true, unless it is opposing the generally accepted facts.In other words the authenticity of the argument cannot be questioned as long as it is not against established facts.
For Example,if one argument suggests that mohd.Ali is stronger than Mike Tyson, we have to take it as true.

(2) Personal opinion about the proposal shall be ignored.Even if one has an opinion about the proposal, in discussion it cannot taken into consideration.In other words, the judgement should always be unbiased.

(3) Sometimes one may come across a situation in which an arguments (say "India should declare war against the whole world") is absurd. But if it is strong enough in the given context it has to be taken as a strong argument. one cannot deny this argument terming this as absurd.
To determine the strength of an argument, one has to follow a methodical way which is explained below.

Preliminary screening:

In this stage,the given arguments are read superficially certain arguments are so obvious that they can be eliminated in one glance. read the argument and discard it if it is:
-ambiguous
-disproportionate
-irrelevant
-comparative
-simpllistic

Ambiguous:

The argument should have clarity in the reason suggested in it. The argument should be contextual and express its support or opposition to the given statement in explicit terms.

example:

statement:
should India wage war against Pakistan?

Argument:
No, both India and Pakistan are at fault.

Analysis:
Here, through the argument refers to the subject in the statement, it has no clarity.We cannot find out what the argument wants to say. Thus the argument is ambiguous.

Disproportionate:

The reasons given in the argument, in support or against the given statement, should be comparable to the magnitude of situation given in the statement. It should be neither same as "trying to kill an elephant with a needle" nor "trying to kill a mosquito with a sword".

Example:

Statement:
Should every citizen be asked to use only pencil to write instead of pen?

Argument:
Yes, usage of pencil lead to reduction in wastage of paper.This helps in protection of environment.

Analysis:
The argument links usage of pencil to protection of environment, because errors can be rectified on the same paper instead of using a new paper and hence wastage of paper can be reduced. This measure, in practice, makes little difference to the environment, hence the argument is rejected.

Irrelevant:

The argument should relate its reasoning to the context given in the statement.

Example:

Statement:
Should the syllabus for primary classes be reduced, to enable the students to understand the concepts piece meal?

Argument:
1.No, it gives more leisure to students, which may lead to juvenile delinquency.
2.No, the syllabus should include subjects that help in increasing IQ levels of students

In the given statement, a course of action is suggested to achieve the ultimate aim of enabling students to understand the subjects better. The arguments should base their reasoning as to whether the suggested action results in achievement of the ultimate aim or not. The reason given in argument (1) is out of context when compared to the statement. Hence this argument is irrelevant.

Argument(2) has relevance to the above statement, as it reasons on the same lines as the statement. The statement should include what ever it wants to achieve through the suggested course of action.

Comparative:

The argument should suggest why or why not the proposed action be implemented, basing on favourable or adverse result that follow after implemented. But it should not support or deny the suggestion, because such action has been taken up or not taken up else where.

Example:

statement:
should India reform its taxation policy?

Argument:
1. Yes, it helps in rationalization of taxes.
2. Yes, many countries are doing so.

Analysis:
Argument(1) Is a valid argument because it is based on a positive result that would follow the suggested action.
Argument(2) Is not based on any resulting effect of the suggested action. It is only comparing with other countries. Other may have their own reasons for taking up such measures. Hence, this is not a valid argument.

Simplistic:

These kind of arguments, through they are related to the statements, make a simple assertion or there is on substantiation to strengthen the argument.

Example:

Statement:
Should India wage war against Pakistan?

Argument:
1) Yes, it should be done immediately.
2) No, it is not going to help.

Analysis:
Argument (1) simply suggests that it should be done immediately, but does not give any reason as to why it should be done. Hence, this argument is too simple.
Argument(2) does not show how it is not going to help. Of course, it has show a reason why such an action should not be taken up, but does not dwell deep into the reason. Hence, argument(2) is also simplistic.

Let us take a few examples to understand how the above methods help in solving questions.

Directions for examples:

make your answer as
Choice (1)  If only statement I is a strong argument.
Choice (2)  If only statement II is a strong argument.
Choice (3)  If either I or II is a strong argument.
Choice (4)  If neither I nor II is a strong argument
Choice (5)  If both I and II strong.

Examples:

1. Should male labourers be paid more than female labourers?
I. Yes, Even physiologists confirm that the structure of male body is such that males can do more work when compared to females, in a fixed period of time.
II. No, This puts a question mark over gender equality in the society.

Solution:

Argument I: It talks about the opinion of physiologists. Here, we cannot check the validity of the physiologists opinion, We have to assume that the information given is true and check whether such information supports the proposal strongly. If the information is true, then it gives a valid reason for higher wages given to males. Hence, this is a strong arguments.
Argument II: There are many factors which cause inequality in the society. Lower wages is not a cause for inequality. Therefore, argument II cannot be considered a strong arguments. Only statement I is a strong argument.
Choice(1).

Browse More Articles

Tweet

Written by Unknown

We are Creative Blogger Theme Wavers which provides user friendly, effective and easy to use themes. Each support has free and providing HD support screen casting.