I found many parts of Chapter 7, Counter-arguments, that I thought was interesting. I learned various things in chapter 7 that were significant and may be used in arguments. In the book "Critical Thinking" by Richard L. Epstein, he discusses counter-arguments. When students cannot evaluate an argument, they tend to raise the objective in an argument. As Epstein states, raising arguments is a method to show that an argument is bad or weak. Raising objectives creates a argument to beg a question and demonstrates that a premise is unstated and uncertain. Epstein also discusses situations of refuting an argument. There are two ways to refute an argument. An argument can be refuted directly or indirectly. There are three direct ways of refuting an argument. The steps consist of illustrating at least one premise is dubious, demonstrating that the argument is not valid or strong and to prove that the conclusion is false.
Blankcanvas
I just wanted to say, good blog this week. Almost everyone wrote about counterarguments and raising objectives. I guess we understood what Epstein was talking about in the book. I liked the counterargument section in the book. My sister and I always use counterarguments. She says something and my big mouth have to object back, which then creates a mess. I want to win, and she wants to win, so we do not stop until one wins. It always end out bad, and none of us wins. We get mad at each other, but at the end of the day, she is still my sister and I love her. Counterarguments can be good or bad I would say. Nevertheless, good job on the blog. I loved it!
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading you post! I too read about counter-arguments and about how to directly and indirectly refute arguments. What I learned about when reading how to refute directly, I learned about how to follow the three steps in order to prove the statement false, which consist of prove at least one premise false, to prove that the argument is weak, and to conclude that the conclusion is false based on it’s false premises. To refute indirectly, the book puts much stress on how to reduce to absurd, which eliminates the inconsistency in the argument. Thank you for your post!
ReplyDelete