ANALYZING ARGUEMENTS

LARIN, Christian John V.

L.L.B.-1E
02/03/2018
ANALYZING ARGUMENTS

I. Paraphrasing Arguments

What is Paraphrasing?

Paraphrasing is clearly restating in your own words the ideas or thoughts of another person. A
paraphrase differs from a summary, which tends to be much shorter and contains only the main
ideas of a text.

Paraphrasing is restating the argument in prose form, using simpler language, true to your own
voice, that is consistent with the author’s intent, but is shorter than the original argument.

Why do we paraphrase?

As stated in the book Introduction to Logic , “ The most common, and perhaps the most useful
technique for analysis is paraphrase. We paraphrase an argument by setting forth its propositions
in clear language and in logical order. This may require the reformulation of sentences, and
therefore great care must be taken to ensure that the paraphrase put forward captures correctly
and completely the argument that was to be analyzed.”

Criteria of a Good Paraphrasing:

1. All major premises are identified

2. Conclusion is identified

3. All premises and conclusion contain a complete thought (subject – object – verb)

4. Premises are arranged in logical order with sub-arguments identified

Steps in Paraphrasing:

1. Identify the main conclusion. Conclusion indicator words include: therefore, so, thus, hence,
then, accordingly, consequently, shows that, demonstrates that, it follows that .

2. Identify those statements in the passage that are put forward as support of the conclusion.
Premise indicator words include: since, because, for, given that, it follows from.

3. Omit any material that serves as purely background information, introductory or editorial
remarks, purely rhetorical comments, repetitions or comments not relevant to the central point
note that if you find yourself eliminating a great deal of the essay because it is not relevant to the
conclusion, it may be because you’ve missed the author’s intended conclusion.

4. Check that each premise and conclusion is a self-contained complete statement.

5. Check that no premise or conclusion itself expresses a whole argument – if it does so then it
needs to be broken down into further elements

6. Number each premise and organize them in a logical order which best demonstrates how they
relate to each other and how they lead to the conclusion – this is not necessarily the order found in
the passage

7. Check your paraphrasing against the original passage to see whether you have left out anything
essential or included anything that you think should not have been included.

8. Finally, reread the passage and check that your paraphrasing is still true to the original intent.

Examples of Paraphrasing an Argument:

Argument: Stores nationwide have been selling cigarettes and alcoholic beverages to minors. Such
violations are considered as in violation of the law.

1. Selling cigarettes to minors below 18 years of age is unlawful.

2. The store sold cigarettes to a minors nationwide.
3. Therefore, the stores nationwide violate the law.

Argument: A person in the name of Mr. Jackson is a foreigner who wants to own land in the
Philippines by signing a deed of sale. The deed of sale is considered as unconstitutional as the
Constitution prohibits such ownership.

1. The Constitution prohibits foreigners to acquire or hold lands of the public domain.
2. Signing this dead of sale will enable Mr. Jackson, an American, to acquire the title of this
public domain.
3. Therefore, signing the deed of sale for a parcel of land by a foreigner is unconstitutional.

II. DIAGRAMMING ARGUMENTS

What is diagramming?

As stated in the book Introduction to Logic, “A second technique for the analysis of arguments is
diagramming. With a diagram we can represent the structure of an argument graphically; the flow
of premises and conclusions is displayed in a two-dimensional chart, or picture, on the page. A
diagram is not needed for a simple argument, even though drawing one can enhance our
understanding. When an argument is complex, with many premises entwined in various ways, a
diagram can be exceedingly helpful.”

Diagrams provide an overall picture of the structure of the argument. As such, potential problems
or gaps in the argument quickly reveal themselves as well.
What is the application of Diagramming Arguments?

Aside from analyzing arguments, argument diagrams are also good for:

1. It aids in organizing arguments to be used.

2. It makes communicating arguments much easier.

When is diagramming arguments used in the real world application?

Argument diagrams have been used to organize complicated arguments in:

1. The academia (especially philosophy)

2. In court rooms
3. As well as industry (think listing ‘pros’ and ‘cons’ in the context of decision making)

It’s application with the Law.

In diagramming arguments, the writer or the author will have a background on what he will use as
a proposition. Thus, a legalist will be able to formulate different patterns and deliveries of the
arguments.

Diagramming makes the author to be creative and complex in which can be helpful in it`s
application with the facts and evidences of a case. In which, changes can be made when needed.

Examples:

I. In General

1. Argument:

1.) John looks tired.

2.) He has dark circles under his eyes.

3.) Therefore, he didn't get much sleep last night.

Diagram:
2.Argument :

1.)The Cavaliers lost to the Warriors.

2.)Basketball is a team sport.

3.)Each and every player is to be blamed for the loss.

Diagram:

II. In Application to Law

1.) Argument:

1.The defendant did not fire the gun.

2. According to the medico-legal examination, there was no trace of gunpowder residue on any
part of his body and clothing.

3. If he fired the gun, there must be gunpowder residue on his body and clothing.

2.) Argument:

1. All contracts with vague terms are void.

2. This contract is not void.
3. As such, this contract does not contain vague terms.
III. Diagramming Arguementative Passages

Most arguments are considered to be complex and complicated. Analyzing such will formulate a
composition of premises and subconclusions which will be difficult to understand but only such
premises will be used in the arguments as subconclusions are considered as making the argument
finalized.

The diagramming technique is definitely helpful, but there is no automatic way to determine
whether the diagram actually does embody the author’s intent precisely. More than one reasonable
understanding may be accessible to an individual, and in that case supplementary than one diagram
can reasonably be used to show the logical structure of that passage.

Determining to comprehend the course of the author’s reasoning, and to categorize the role of each
element in the passage as part of that flow. It may include statements whose role is unclear;
connections among the statements in the argument may be tangled or misstated; the flow of
argument may be disorganized even in the mind of the author.

When we have identified the arguments within a passage and the relations of those arguments, can
we go about deciding whether the conclusions do indeed follow from the premises affirmed.

Logical analysis, paraphrase supported by diagrams, can expose such deficiencies. By exhibiting
the structure of a reasoning process, we can better see what its strengths and weaknesses may be.
The aim and special province of logic is the evaluation of arguments, but successful evaluation
presupposes a clear grasp of the structure of the argument in question.

How is Complex Argumentative Passage applied in Law?

Such complexity will be able to determine on how strong is ones argument as it`s diagramming
will formulate a pattern which will display not only ones weaknesses but also its strengths. The
application such can used in cases wherein elements and circumstances are present. As they are
existing in Criminal Law, Political Law and also Civil Law.

Example of such Diagram

The example that follow show the ways in which we can set forth the connections between
premises and conclusions.
Argument:

1. Anyone proven to commit a criminal offense should be dismissed from government

service.

2. Vargas is a city councilor.

3. Vargas falsified her PDS (personal data sheet).

4. Anything that contains information available for inspection by the public is considered as
a public document.

5. A PDS contains information available for inspection of the public.

6. A PDS is a public document.

7. Vargas falsified a public document.

8. Vargas is then liable for falsifying a public document.

9. Falsifying a public document is a criminal offense.

10. Vargas committed a criminal offense.

11. Therefore, Vargas ought to be dismissed from government service.

IV. Problems in Reasoning

In reasoning we advance from premises recognized to conclusions. We create arguments of our

own every day, in determining how we shall act, in judging the conduct of others, in defending our
moral or political convictions, and so on. Skill in formulating good arguments is of enormous
value, and this skill can be improved with practice.

As such problems may be forced which are deliberate to check and strengthen logical skills.
Problems are far well-ordered than those that arise in real life, of course. But solving them may
require extended reasoning in arrangements not very different from those employed by a detective,
a journalist, or a juror. Chains of inferences will be needed, in which sub conclusions are used as
premises in subsequent arguments. Finding the solution may require the creative recombination of
information given earlier or discovered.

Many real world problems are not described accurately, and their misdescription may prove so
misleading that no solution can be reached. In cases of that kind, some part or parts of the
description of the problem need to be rejected or replaced

Matrix Problem

In problems of this type become more complex, it is useful to construct a graphic display of the
alternatives. A diagram displaying the relation of the facts stated will make the solution to the
problem much easier.

Example:

In a canteen, the mailman, the gardener and the driver are eating their lunch. Marco, Diego, and
Bruce, though not necessarily in that order. The mailman, who is an only child, earns the least.
Bruce, who married Diego’s sister, earns more than the driver. What position does each of the
three persons hold?

Mailman Gardener Driver

Marco Y N N

Diego N N Y

Bruce N Y N

In solving such a problem, one must go over the obvious facts presented. As such, We should first
consider that Bruce earns more than the driver therefore crossing out the facts that he is the
Gardener. Since from the statement in which Bruce was stated to more than the driver, it was also
detailed that Diego has a sister then he is not the mailman but the driver as the mailman is an only
child. Then for identity of the mailman would be Marco as he is the last one left from deducing
the problem.

Our matrix now filled in, the full solution is evident: Marco is the mailman; Bruce is the Driver;
Diego is the Gardener.

Application in General

In the real world, moreover, even when they are described exactly, complications may be
unfinished in that something not initially available may be crucial for the clarification.

The solution may depend on some additional scientific discovery, or some previously unimagined
invention or equipment, or the search of some as-yet-unexplored territory.

Application with the Law

Application with the law is mainly centered on the use of new laws and orders by the judiciary
which will further complicate the arguments already formulated by the legalist.

Therefore arguments are to be used properly for its delivery to be concise and plausible for the
practitioners of the law.

V. CONCLUSION

Analyzing arguments are either simple or complex because it is addressed with the author’s
or writer’s intent in its delivery in forms of premises and conclusions. This is why it is so important
to be learned as it does not only improve a person`s argument but it makes it possible to determine
the weaknesses and strengths of the argument to be presented.

As future legalist, we need this to be able to interpret the complexity of the statements
presented in cases and laws to be applied in our everyday life. It can be disturbingly hard to
understand at sometimes but the accomplishment to understand such statements and provisions
will improve in our formulation of arguments to be presented in courts or in our daily application
of such.

Thus, analyzation of arguments are needed by everybody as further improves one`s

analyzation of any argument in its daily life and that reasoning will be thoroughly understood in
such way that people are able to determine the necessary weaknesses and strengths of complex
arguments and reasoning.