The Language of Argument

8 4

cH A Pt eR 5 ■ D e e p A n a l y s i s

steps are easier to follow than complex ones, we can understand the argu-

ment better when it is broken down. Dissection makes us more likely to no-

tice any flaws in the argument. It also enables us to pinpoint exactly where

the argument fails, if it does.

The process of dissecting an argument is a skill that can be learned only

by practice. Let’s start with a simple example:

Joe won his bet, because all he had to do was eat five pounds of oysters,

and he ate nine dozen oysters, which weigh more than five pounds.

The simplest unpacking of this argument yields the following restatement in

standard form:

(1) All Joe had to do was eat five pounds of oysters, and he ate nine

dozen oysters, which weigh more than five pounds.

∴(2) Joe won his bet. (from 1)

If we think about the premise of this argument, we see that it actually con-

tains three claims. The argument will be clearer if we separate these claims

into independent premises and add a few words for the sake of clarity. The

following, then, is a better representation of this argument:

(1) All Joe had to do (to win his bet) was eat five pounds of oysters.

(2) Joe ate nine dozen oysters.

(3) Nine dozen oysters weigh more than five pounds.

∴(4) Joe won his bet. (from 1–3)

With the premise split up in this way, it becomes obvious that there are three

separate ways in which the argument could fail. One possibility is that the

first premise is false because Joe had to do more than just eat five pounds of

oysters to win his bet: Maybe what he bet was that he could eat five pounds

in five minutes. Another possibility is that the second premise is false be-

cause Joe did not really eat nine dozen oysters: Maybe he really ate one

dozen oysters cut into nine dozen pieces. A final way in which the argu-

ment could fail is if the third premise is false because nine dozen oysters do

not weigh more than five pounds: Maybe the oysters that Joe ate were very

small, or maybe nine dozen oysters weigh more than five pounds only when

they are still in their shells, but Joe did not eat the shells. In any case, break-

ing down complex premises into simpler ones makes it easier to see exactly

where the argument goes wrong, if it does. Consequently, we can be more

confident that an argument does not go wrong if we do not see any problem

in it even after we have broken it down completely.

Although it is a good idea to break down the premises of an argument when

this is possible, we have to be careful not to do this in a way that changes the

logical structure of the argument. Suppose someone argues like this:

97364_ch05_ptg01_079-110.indd 84 15/11/13 9:53 AM

some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materiallyCopyright 201^3 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights,

affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.