1.

There are two components to an argument, premises and conclusions.

Premises refer to the motives/reasons for accepting an assertion. The
conclusion refers to the actual claim. The conclusion highlights the view
taken and the premises are to state the reasons why that view/position was
taken. Key word indicators make it easier to tell the difference between
premises and conclusions. Some key word indicators for premises include,
for these reasons, from which it follows, and since. A few key word
indicators for conclusion include, as a result, therefore, and
consequently.
2. An argument consists of a set of assertions or statements. The claims can be
true or false. An explanation provides detail and typically involves an already
accepted point followed by a cause or causes for the point.
Argument example:
I believe my mother must have forgotten to pick me up. She is almost thirty
minutes late.
This is an argument example because it is claimed in the beginning that the
mother must have forgotten to pick up her child providing evidence for the
conclusion that she is thirty minutes late. The writer is attempting to
persuade the reader to believe because the mother is late she must have
forgotten however there could be several reasons why she is late. She could
be stuck in traffic, leaving late from work, and so on. However the writer
looks away from those options and pinpoints that the mother must have
forgotten.
Explanation example:
My hair is wet because I just washed it.
This is an explanation example because there is no argumentation involved.
The sentence is not attempting to convince the reader of anything. The
conclusion is accepted naturally because when you shower your hair gets
wet because you just washed it. This sentence simply states a point and its
resulting cause. This sentence highlights why the hair is wet, providing
causes.
3. An objective claim only counts if it meets three criterias. An objective
statement must include a truth appeal, allowing the statement to be either
true or false, an approved upon technique to verify if the statement is true or
false, and when in disagreement about the truth/falseness behind the claim,
someone has to be incorrect in their assertion.
Example:
In order to park overnight in Pasadena, a parking permit is required.
This is an example of an objective statement because it can be either true or
false (truth value). You can either need an overnight parking permit or
Pasadena may allow vehicles to park overnight for free. To validate this
statement an agreed upon way to determine whether you need a parking
permit or not is to check the city of Pasadena website. When the statement is

validated online it will result in a right and wrong answer. Whoever

agreed/stated that an overnight parking permit in Pasadena was needed is
correct. Those who disagreed with the statement and proclaimed that
Pasadena permitted overnight parking for free would sadly be wrong.
4. A deductive argument attempts to create a logical connection among
premises and conclusions. Deductive argumentation forms this relationship
by created true premises leading to the idea that the conclusion has to be
100% true as well. This form of argumentation aims to be legitimate. An
example of this would be, All dogs have tails and golden retrievers are dogs,
so golden retrievers have tails. This statement highlights the fact since the
premises is valid then the conclusion that follows must also be true that
golden retrievers must have tails since all dogs have tails. Inductive
argument works a bit differently. With inductive argumentation a conclusion
holds the possibility to be true. The claim attempts to be solid but never aims
for full legitimacy like deductive argumentation. Inductive reasoning is more
generalized and based on predictions from the past or present for the future.
An example would be My dog is lazy, so your dog will probably be lazy too.
The sentence gives a generalized idea with no aim for complete truth because
not all dogs are lazy. It is an analogy basically. Deductive focuses more on
truth while inductive reasoning focuses more on analogies, generalizations,
and predictions.