Identifying Argument Structure:
- Conclusion: What is the main claim being made?
- Premises: What reasons support the conclusion?
- Hidden Assumptions: What unstated beliefs are necessary?
- Evidence: What data or examples are provided?
Evaluating Argument Quality:
Strength Assessment:
- Are the premises true?
- Do the premises support the conclusion?
- Are there unstated assumptions?
- Is the reasoning valid?
Weakness Identification:
- False Premises: Factually incorrect starting points
- Non Sequitur: Conclusion doesn't follow from premises
- Missing Evidence: Claims without adequate support
- Circular Reasoning: Conclusion restates premises
Common Logical Fallacies (Recognition and Response):
Ad Hominem:
- Pattern: Attacking the person rather than their argument
- Example: "You can't trust John's economic analysis because he's young"
- Response: "Let's focus on the merits of the analysis itself"
Straw Man:
- Pattern: Misrepresenting someone's position to make it easier to attack
- Example: "Environmentalists want to destroy the economy"
- Response: "That's not what they're actually proposing. Let's look at their real position"
False Dichotomy:
- Pattern: Presenting only two options when more exist
- Example: "You're either with us or against us"
- Response: "Are there other alternatives we should consider?"
Appeal to Authority:
- Pattern: Accepting claims because an authority figure made them
- Example: "Einstein believed in God, so God must exist"
- Response: "What's the evidence independent of who said it?"