Home / Tutorial 1 Previous | Up

Tutorial 1 - Simple Arguments

Theory pages
Reasons
A reason is a piece of evidence in support of some claim. A claim is an idea which somebody
says is true.
To map a reason, put the reason and the claim in boxes, and link them together. Here is one
way to do it:


Examples
Consider this piece of reasoning from Apollo Moon Landings:
There should be lots of stars in the Apollo pictures, because if we go out on a clear night
and look up, we see many stars. (3.1)
Here, the claim being supported is There should be lots of stars in the Apollo pictures. The
evidence is that when we go out on a clear night and look up, we see many stars. Here is how
to map this reasoning:

Here is another example:
The 382 kilograms of lunar material brought back to Earth by the six Apollo missions
did come from the Moon. Therefore, Apollo astronauts must have landed on the Moon.
(9.1-2)
Claim: The Apollo astronauts landed on the Moon.
Evidence: The six Apollo missions brought back to Earth 382 kilograms of material which came
from the Moon.


Discussion
People use the word "reason" in many different ways. You'll see this if you look it up in the
dictionary. In these tutorials, we are using the word in one specific way: to refer to a piece of
evidence for a claim.
Technically, a piece of evidence (and hence a reason) consists of a set of claims presenting
evidence that another claim is true. Don't worry if that doesn't make much sense right now; it
will become more clear in Tutorial 2.
There are lots of superficially different ways to map a reason. The key thing is to visually
distinguish the reason and the supported claim, and to show the link between them. The
mapping approach we adopt here is the one used in the Rationale software. Using this
approach show that something is a reasonby the use of (a) the colour green, for reason; and (b)
the word "because" just above the reason.
Some reasons are good (strong, powerful, valid). That is, they provide strong evidence for the
claim. Some reasons are terrible. These tutorials are concerned with the structure of
reasoning, not its quality.

New Concepts
A claim is a proposition put forward by somebody as true. A proposition is an idea which is
either true or false.
A reason is a piece of evidence in support of some claim. Technically, a reason is a set of claims
working together to provide evidence that another claim is true.
Contentions
A claim supported by a reason is called a "contention".


Discussion
The word "contention" is technical vocabulary. It is the special word we use for a claim for
which some evidence has been provided.
Note that very often, logicians use the word "conclusion" where we are using "contention".
Unfortunately "conclusion" is rather misleading in a number of ways.

New Concepts
A contention is a claim for which some evidence is presented, whether for or against. Logicians
often use the word "conclusion" to refer to a contention.
Objections
An objection is like a reason, but is evidence against a contention.


Examples
Consider the following passage from Apollo Moon Landings:
There are no stars in the background of the Apollo pictures. Therefore, Apollo
astronauts did not land on the Moon. (3.0-1)
Here, we are given evidence against the idea that Apollo astronauts landed on the Moon.
The contention is that Apollo astronauts landed on the Moon; the evidence (which goes against
it) is that there are no stars in the background of the Apollo pictures.
Here is a map of the reasoning, showing the objection in red:

Here is another example:
It is not true that there should be lots of stars in the Apollo pictures, because stars can be
very faint.
The contention (the thing being objected to) is that there should be lots of stars in the Apollo
pictures; the evidence is that stars can be very faint.


Discussion
Objections and reasons are very similar; it is just that while reasons present
evidence supporting the contention, objections present evidence against it. Roughly, an objection
"says why the contention wouldn't be true."
You may have noticed that a reason can be transformed into an objection, and vice versa, if you
reverse the contention.
In the mapping approach used here, we show that something is an objection by the use of (a)
the colour red, for objection; and (b) the word "but" just above the objection.
Technically, an objection is, like a reason, really a set of claims. This will become more clear in
Tutorial 2.

New Concepts
An objection is a piece of evidence against some claim. Technically, an objection is set of
claims working together to provide evidence that another claim is false.

Simple Arguments
A simple argument is just a contention with a single reason for it, OR a contention with a
single objection to it.
Here are two simple arguments:


Examples

The simple argument is the whole structure
(reason AND contention).

This is another simple argument, made up of an
objection to a contention. Notice that the
contention happens to be the same as in the first
example; for more on this see Tutorial 3.

Discussion
Note that all you need for a simple argument is a single piece of evidence bearing upon a single
contention. You don't need both a reason and an objection. In other words, a simple argument
is not a debate; it is just an elementary piece of reasoning.
"Simple" doesn't mean small, short or obvious. A simple argument might be quite technical or
hard to understand. What makes an argument simple is that it has just one contention
and one piece of evidence.
This is important because the simple argument is the basic unit of all reasoning. All
arguments, no matter how complex, are made up of simple arguments hooked up together. This
will become more clear in Tutorials 3 and 4.

New Concepts
A simple argument is just a contention with a single piece of reason for it, or a contention with
a single objection to it.

Use Sentences
When argument mapping, boxes should contain full, grammatical, declarative sentences.


Examples
Use complete sentences, not words or phrases:



Correct
Use declarative sentences, not other kinds of sentences such as questions:



Correct

Discussion
It is very tempting to just use a word or simple phrase instead of a full grammatical sentence.
This saves effort and space, and you feel as if you have the complete claim in your mind; all you
need is a few words to indicate what claim belongs in that place.
However this is wrong. Reasoning is made up of claims, and you can't properly express a claim
in anything less than a full grammatical sentence. Using a word or phrase creates a number
of problems:
You might never properly articulate the claim in your own mind.
Somebody else reading the argument map has to try to guess what claim you
had in mind, and often will guess incorrectly.
As we will see later, without full sentences, you will not be able to apply some
important principles of argument mapping.
Generally, using words or phrases rather than full sentences is sloppy thinking.
A declarative sentence is one which states a proposition which can be true or false. Some
kinds of sentences are not declarative; for example, questionsdon't state propositions.
Reasoning is a matter of the logical or evidential relationships among propositions, so you should
always be using declarative sentences to express reasoning.

New Concepts
A declarative sentence is one which states an idea which can be true or false.

No Reasoning in Boxes
You should avoid putting reasoning in boxes. In an argument map, boxes contain claims,
not whole arguments.
The Apollo astronauts
could not have survived
the journey through the
Van Allen Belt, so they
cannot have been to the
Moon. (6.4)

This box contains a simple piece
of reasoning.

The correct way to map the
argument is to display the
reasoning.

The shadows in the Apollo
images seem to point in
different directions,
suggesting that artificial
lighting was used when
they were taken.
Therefore they were taken
in a studio on Earth.
[Based on 5.1]

The reason here contains a
simple argument. This means that
there are two separate arguments
being made.


Map each argument separately.

Discussion
The whole point of argument mapping is to make the structure of reasoning completely explicit
using graphical techniques such as boxes and arrows. If reasoning is inside a box, it is to some
extent hidden away.
This is not just being pedantic. In following tutorials you'll see that many critical argument
mapping techniques cannot be used unless and until we have fully revealed the structure of the
reasoning.
Summary
Key Points

Note: don't put reasoning inside a box. Argument maps display the structure of reasoning;
don't hide that structure inside a box.

New Concepts
A claim is a proposition put forward by somebody as true. A proposition is an idea which is
either true or false.
A reason is a piece of evidence in support of some claim. Technically, a reason is a set of claims
working together to provide evidence that another claim is true.
A declarative sentence is one which states an idea which can be true or false.
A conclusion is a claim for which some evidence is presented, whether for or against. See
also contention.
An objection is a piece of evidence against some claim. Technically, an objection is set of
claims working together to provide evidence that another claim is false.
A simple argument is just a contention with a single piece of reason for it, or a contention with
a single objection to it.
Glossary | Contents Previous | Up
Copyright Austhink 2003-2006
Last updated 28-Aug-2007