Example #1
"My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the cars in his yard (1). People do not like living next door to such a mess (2). He never drives any of them (3). They all look old and beat up and leak oil all over the place (4). It is bad for neighborhood, and it will decrease property values (5)."
Argument: Yes
Conclusion: My neighbor should get rid of all his cars because he doesn't even drive them and they are effecting the neighborhood in a negative way such as leaking oil on the group.
Additional premises needed - The neighbors think that the cars are a problem because he never drives any of the cars, they leak oil all over the place, and they can potentially decrease the property value of the neighborhood.
Identify any subargument:
Sentence #2 and #4 supports sentence #5. All the sentences support sentence #1.
If no one likes living next to all these leaky, old, and beat up looking cars then it is bad for the neighborhood because it will decrease the property value of the area.
Good argument?
Yes it is a good argument because all the premises seem plausible.
This exercise was pretty useful. One thing that I found helpful in this exercise was breaking down the arguments. Instead of focusing on the whole argument, I took it sentence by sentence.
I really like this analysis for a complex argument because it is very clear and gets straight to the point. This example reminds me of my old neighborhood which is now my parents' house. This guy that lived in the neighborhood did not keep his cars around, but he used to collect different kinds of old vintage items and put them in his front yard. Everyone in the neighborhood thought it was a very big problem because not only did it look absolutely rediculous, but it seemed as if it also would bring down the property value of the neighborhood.
ReplyDelete