The Anatomy of an Argument: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary Tag: Manual revert |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
There are a few ways in which we can represent an argument that make its structure clearer. One popular way is called standard form. Here’s what the argument we have been discussing looks like in standard form: | There are a few ways in which we can represent an argument that make its structure clearer. One popular way is called standard form. Here’s what the argument we have been discussing looks like in standard form: | ||
{| class="wikitable" | {| class="wikitable" | ||
|1. Whoever murdered Carl had access to his rose garden at midnight. | |1. Whoever murdered Carl had access to his rose garden at midnight. | ||
|- | |- | ||
Revision as of 10:30, 9 August 2022
As the term is used in philosophy, an argument is a set of related propositions (called premises) that is given as a reason for believing a further proposition (called the conclusion). Consider, for example, the following, simple argument:
| Whoever murdered Carl had to have access to his rose garden at midnight, and the only person who did was Natalie, therefore Natalie must be the murderer. |
Here the conclusion is that Natalie murdered Carl, and there are two premises: (1) that whoever murdered Carl had access to Carl’s rose garden at midnight, and (2) that only Natalie had such access.
There are a few ways in which we can represent an argument that make its structure clearer. One popular way is called standard form. Here’s what the argument we have been discussing looks like in standard form:
| 1. Whoever murdered Carl had access to his rose garden at midnight. | |
| 2. Only Natalie had access to Carl’s rose garden at midnight. | |
| 3. Natalie murdered Carl. | |
|---|---|