A Brief Review
Arguments: Sound or Unsound/Successful or Unsuccessful
The Place of Additional Information in Evaluations of Argument
The Criteria of Evaluation
The Relationship between Your Evaluation and an Argument's Semantic Type
Exercises

A Brief Review
In your notes for "Notes on Argument Basics," you were introduced to each of the key concepts about argumentation, including the evaluation of arguments. As a point of review, note that the evaluation of arguments has no effect on the distinction of the structural or semantic types. Structurally, an argument is either "simple" or "complex" because of the presence of only one conclusion (in the simple argument) or more than one conclusion (in the complex argument). Your evaluation of the argument will not change the structure. Similarly, an argument is either "non-deductive" or "deductive" by virture of the amount of support given the final conclusion by the premises. If the premises, at best, make the conclusion only likely or probable, the argument is non-deductive (by definition); your evaluation will not change that. On the other hand, if the premises actually guarantee the conclusion, the argument is said to be deductive (by definition); your evaluation will not change that either.

(Return to Top of Document)

Arguments: Sound or Unsound/Successful or Unsuccessful

You will recall from the discussion in "Notes on Argument Basics," arguments will be evaluated as either "successful/unsuccessful" in the case of non-deductive arguments, and as either "sound/ unsound" in the case of deductive arguments.

Let's return to our "Turner Falls" example for a moment. Remember the following deductive argument:

Premise 1: If it is cold, we must sleep outside.
Premise 2: It will be cold.
Therefore: We'll sleep outside.

Clearly, the premises guarantee the exact wording because the condition established in Premise 1--without an option-- is fulfilled in Premise 2. The two premises, then, give us no choice.  We're stuck with the conclusion.

Note the next example:

Premise 1: If the motel rooms are full, we must sleep outside.
Premise 2: The motel rooms are full.
Therefore: We'll sleep outside.

Like the first argument above, the second argument is also a deductive argument since the conditional premise gives us no choice if the condition is met or fulfilled. Premise 2 announces that the condition has been met, so the conclusion is guaranteed: "We'll sleep outside."

Note, however, that the second argument, although it derives the same conclusion ("We'll sleep outside"), is far superior to the first. We will find the second article "sound" while we must reject the first as "unsound." Clearly, there's something unacceptable about the first premise; experience teaches us that it is foolish to sleep outside if it is cold (we'll probably get sick). That kind of information is critical to a satisfactory or acceptable evaluation of the argument. Yet that information is not available in the argument itself; it is, rather, additional information that we have brought to bear in our evaluation.

(Return to Top of Document)

The Place of Additional Information in Evaluations of Argument
None of us lives in a vacuum. We have accumulated information throughout a lifetime, either by default--we were in the right place at the right time, or our interests have taken us into a more extensive body of knowledge than others around us. Additionally, our experiences has prompted the development of a whole values and belief system that gives form and stability to our world view.

All of this information, in addition to our values and beliefs, are brought to bare in the evaluation of arguments. It is on the basis of this broader bank of information and data that confirms for us the relative value or relative worthlessness of a writer's or other person's argument.

(Return to Top of Document)

The Criteria of Evaluation
Evaluations of arguments focus on the quality of the premises provided, either as stated or implied, for a conclusion. There are three criteria or standards on which we will evaluate the premises and, hence, the argument itself. These three criteria are the truth, acceptability, and questionable nature of the premises.

True or False
If we know that a premise is true, then it will lend support for the conclusion. If we know it to be false, however, it will detract from our value in the conclusion.

Acceptable or Unacceptable
For some premises, we may not be able to determine for ourselves the truthfulness or the falseness of a claim. Based on our own background and world view, however, we will be led to find the claim either acceptable or unacceptable. Acceptable premises support a conclusion; obviously, unacceptable premises detract from our value in the conclusion.

Unquestioned or Questionable
For still other premises, we may be somewhat reserved in our trust in a claim, so much so that we may be led to question it. The result will be that we suspend our toleration of the claim and may even reject it outright. On the other hand, we may find no cause for questioning the information or position of a claim, so that by default, we find it acceptable.

(Return to Top of Document)

The Relationship between Your Evaluation and an Argument's Semantic Type
It may seem belaboring a point, but because so many students have difficulty with the concept, it's important to emphasize it one more time: your evaluation, either positively or negatively, has no effect on the designation of the semantic type. The argument will be either deductive or non-deductive. Note further, whether an argument is deductive or non-deductive has no bearing on its value.

If an argument is deductive, you will evaluate it as either sound or unsound, depending on the quality of the support the premises bring to the conclusion.

If the argument is non-deductive, you will evaluate it as either successful or unsuccessful, depending on the quality of the support the premises bring to the conclusion.

Go to Exercise 2
Go to Exercise 3
Go to Exercise 4
Go to Exercise 5