B Recognizing Arguments

When we listen to someone speak, or read a written text, we expect there to be some relationship among the statements, some organizing principle or structure. There are various structures, not all of them arguments. In a narrative, for example, there is usu-ally no argument; instead, the author simply describes a sequence of events, and the organizing principle is the order of their occurrence, as in the following passage from George Orwell’s 1984:

Winston Smith, his chin nuzzled into his breast in an effort to escape the vile wind, slipped quickly through the glass doors of Victory Mansions, though not quickly enough to prevent a swirl of gritty dust from entering along with him.

A descriptive passage states a series of facts about something; the series may be orga-nized in various ways, but again there is usually no argument, as in another passage from 1984:

The Ministry of Truth was startlingly different from any other object in sight. It was an enormous pyramidal structure of glittering white concrete, soaring up, terrace after terrace, 300 metres into the air.

What distinguishes an argument from these other patterns is the effort to support a statement logically. The author doesn’t just tell us something that he takes to be true;

he also presents reasons intended to convince us that it is true. This intention is usu-ally signaled by certain verbal clues. For example, the word “therefore” indicates that a statement is intended as a conclusion. The word “because” usually indicates a premise.

There are many such indicator words and phrases in English. The more common ones are listed in the Strategy box.

When you encounter such words, it is a good sign that you are in the presence of an argument and you can use the indicators to distinguish the premises from the conclusion.

But you cannot use them mechanically. Some of the words are used in contexts other than argument. In the statement “Since I arrived in Dry Gulch, I haven’t seen a single green thing,” the word “since” indicates a temporal relation, not a logical one.

However, the absence of indicator words does not necessarily mean the absence of an argument. If I say “Dry Gulch is an arid place—I haven’t seen a single green thing,” I am offering evidence in support of a conclusion, even though I used no indicator words.

A final point to keep in mind is that many of the words listed above can be used to indicate an explanation rather than an argument. In an argu ment, we are trying to show that some proposition—the conclusion—is true. In an explanation, we are trying to show why it is true. To see the difference, compare the following two statements:

1. It will probably rain tomorrow, because a cold front is moving in.

2. It rained yesterday because a cold front moved in.

In both cases, the word “because” indicates a relationship between the cold front and rain. But the relationship is not the same in both cases. In sentence 1, we are using the presence of a cold front as evidence that it will rain; we are offering an argument. In sentence 2, we already know that it rained. We don’t have to offer an argument for that proposition; we know it is true because we observed the rain directly. What we are doing Premise indicators

Since Because As For Given that Assuming that Inasmuch as The reason is that In view of the fact that

Conclusion indicators Therefore

Thus So

Consequently As a result It follows that Hence

Which means that Which implies that

STRATEGY

To identify premises and conclusions, look for the following indicator words:

4.1 Elements of Reasoning 71

instead is stating the cause for the rain; we are offering an explanation. In an argument, we reason forward from the premises to the conclusion; in an explanation, we reason backward from a fact to the cause or reason for that fact.

To recognize an argu ment, the most important technique is to read carefully, ask-ing what point the author is tryask-ing to make, isolatask-ing the propositions asserted, and identifying the relationships among them.

Let’s look at an example from a speech by President Ronald Reagan in 1984:

“The truth is,” Mr. Reagan said, “politics and mor ality are inseparable, and as mo-rality’s foundation is religion, religion and politics are necessarily related. We need religion as a guide.” [New York Times, August 24, 1984]

There are three propositions here: (1) politics and morality are inseparable; (2) moral-ity’s foundation is religion; and (3) religion and politics are necessarily related. The final sentence—“We need religion as a guide”—is essentially a restatement of 3. Do we have an argument? Well, the word “as” indicates that 2 is intended as a premise. The word

“necessarily” suggests that 3 is a conclusion. It means: If you accept 1 and 2, you should accept 3 as well. So in essence Mr. Reagan was saying: Politics depends on morality, mo-rality depends on religion, therefore politics depends on religion. That’s an argument.

Let’s consider one more example.

The rule of law means that people should be punished only for a breach of a law, not by the arbitrary discretion of government. It means that laws should be clearly stated and made known to the public. And it means that laws should be applied uniformly to everyone—everyone is equal before the law.

The rule of law is a worthy ideal. To the extent that it can be achieved, it allows people to know which actions will and will not get them in trouble with the law. It is also fair in treating all people without discrimination.

The first paragraph is a description of the rule of law. Though it describes an ideal, and is cast in positive terms, it does not actually make a case for the ideal. It is not an argu-ment. The second paragraph does provide an arguargu-ment. No indicator words are used, but the paragraph clearly makes a case for the conclusion that the rule of law is a worthy ideal by offering two premises in support of it.

So far I have asked you to distinguish arguments from nonarguments in a basically intuitive way, with some help from indicator words. The distinction will become easier to draw as you learn more about the inner workings of arguments—a topic we will turn to next.

EXERCISE 4.1

For each of the following paragraphs, determine whether it contains an argument. If so, identify the premises and the conclusion.

❋1. We parked at the trailhead and be-gan our hike up Mt. Washington, walking through a dense forest.

After 2 hours we reached the halfway point and stopped to eat lunch.

2. It’s important to have sturdy boots for this hike, because the trail is very rocky.

3. There are streams to cross and some muddy places, so it is good to have waterproof boots.

❋4. From the top of the mountain, we could see other mountains to the north and the south. None were as high as Washington. A cold wind blew across the entire chain.

5. Since these peaks are above the tree line, hikers are totally exposed to the weather.

6. Cable television can provide the viewer with more channels than broadcast television, and it usually delivers a higher quality picture.

For these reasons, the number of cable subscribers will probably continue to grow rapidly.

❋7. The first cable companies served remote rural communities. These communities were too far from any broadcast station to receive a clear signal over the air. Tall tow-ers, usually located on hills, picked up the signals and distributed them to individual homes.

8. Since cable companies are now serving the suburbs and cities, they pose a competitive challenge to broadcast television.

9. More than half the homes in the country subscribe to cable televi-sion. Basic cable service usually includes local TV channels, such as the three networks, and one or more news channels. For an ad-ditional fee, subscribers can also receive movie channels and other specialized programs.

❋ 10. It is rarely economical for two companies to lay cables in the same area and compete directly. This suggests that cable television is a natural monopoly, which should be regulated by the government.

11. Cable competes with broadcast TV, satellite TV, and other media.

And as a medium of communica-tion, it is protected by the First Amendment. So it should not be regulated.

12. Depression is a condition char-acterized by changes in appetite, sleep patterns, and energy levels.

Depressed individuals often have trouble concentrating and finding pleasure in activities they used to enjoy.

❋ 13. In an experiment involving twins raised in different families, psy-chologists found that the children had significantly similar rates of depression. This indicates that de-pression is more strongly affected by one’s genetics than by one’s environment.

14. Treating depression with medi-cation is the same as treating any illness with medication. Therefore, the patient should not stop taking the medication just because his symptoms have gone.

15. Although depression is an undesirable experience, it can sometimes serve a useful function.

Some researchers believe that de-pression, like pain, signals damag-ing behavior and thought patterns.

So, people with depression can po-tentially improve their condition by becoming more aware of their emotions and habitual attitudes.