Relationship Between Argument and Proof
The assertion as well as the proof have to relate solely to the other person logically to have make a good, appropriate argument. Dilemmas commonly take place in the partnership whenever there are wrong presumptions underlying the assertion, or wrong conclusions drawn on such basis as improper or inadequate evidence.
- You cannot logically argue that adult pupils can’t stand lectures based on interviews with one or two students that are adult. You cannot assume that as this situation does work for one or two adult learners, it is real for several.
- You cannot logically argue which our climate changed in the world as a result of our forays into star. You cannot conclude this one action is the cause that is sole of action.
- You cannot logically argue we need to be either for or against a idea. You cannot assume that only those two reactions occur.
As a whole, the assertion and any presumptions underlying the assertion have to be generally speaking appropriate, even though the evidence has to be enough, highly relevant to the assertion and free from wrong presumptions and conclusions.
A beneficial accessible text that examines the partnership between an assertion and evidence — the character of argument — is Annette Rottenberg’s “components of Argument,” which makes use of Stephen Toulmin’s classic “The Uses of Argument” as the foundation.
Rottenberg breaks argument down into:
- claim (the argument it self)
- grounds (the evidence)
- warrant (the assumptions that are underlying
She explores the partnership among these bits of argument in the context of composing good arguments. Another text that is good Marlys Mayfield’s “Thinking yourself,” which includes especially helpful chapters on facts, views, presumptions and inferences. Read More