This is a Canadian text with the vast majority of examples being Canadian, focusing on issues and using exercises of immediate concern to Canadian students — same-sex rights, euthanasia, gender issues, and issues around social media. Infused with topical, relevant, Canadian issues and numerous applications and characterized by a clear, student-friendly approach, this text empowers learners to build effective written and verbal arguments and to analyze arguments effectively. This can be done by giving a counter example of the same form of argument with premises that are true under a given interpretation, but a conclusion that is false under that interpretation. Subjects Reasoning — Textbooks. The authors present the content in a modular format, allowing instructors the flexibility to use the book in a variety of ways, for a range of audiences and classes. That is, the rational structure — the relationship of claims, premises, warrants, relations of implication, and conclusion — is not always spelled out and immediately visible and must sometimes be made explicit by are several kinds of arguments in logic, the best-known of which are “deductive” and “inductive. This is truly a pedagogical package designed with both the instructor and student in mind.

An inductive argument is said to be cogent if and only if the truth of the argument’s premises would render the truth of the conclusion probable i. Analyzing Arguments Module 4: Cancel Forgot your password? User acceptance of knowledge-based system recommendations: Some features of WorldCat will not be available.

The lack of deductive validity is known as the problem of ible arguments and argumentation modern argumentation theories, arguments are regarded as defeasible passages from premises to a conclusion.

Unless he or she merely results to name calling or threats, he or she typically presents an argument for his or her position, in the sense described above.


Allow this favorite library to be seen by others Keep this favorite library private. Please create a new list with a new name; move some items to a new or existing list; or delete some items. There are several reasons for this often are not themselves saondon on whether they are arguing for or explaining same types of words and phrases are used in presenting explanations and terms ‘explain’ or ‘explanation,’ et cetera are frequently used in ations are often used within arguments and presented so as to serve as arguments.

Subjects Reasoning — Textbooks. Defeasibility means that when additional information new argumeht or contrary arguments is provided, the premises may be no longer lead to the conclusion non-monotonic reasoning.

Critical thinking : argument and argumentation (Book, ) []

Analyzing Arguments Module 4: Peter John Krek received his B. A typical example is the argument from expert opinion, which has two premises and a conclusion. Defeasible arguments are based on generalizations that hold only in the majority of cases, but are subject to exceptions and defaults. Most recently, Peter served as a corporate training specialist with a leading insurer. Socrates was mortal is an example of sandon by analogy because the reasoning employed in it proceeds from a particular truth in arument premise plato was mortal to a similar particular truth in the conclusion, namely that socrates was mortal.

critical thinking argument and argumentation jean saindon

Citations are based on reference standards. He szindon been an associate of the Centre for the Support of Teaching at York University, and has twice received university teaching awards.

Argumentxtion counter-example follows the same logical form as the previous argument, premise 1: The validity of an argument is not a guarantee of the truth of its conclusion. The name field is required.

Critical thinking : argument and argumentation

Argument and Argumentation one of the most exercise-rich critical thinking texts. Logic and philosophy, an argument is a series of statements typically used to persuade someone of something or to present reasons for accepting a conclusion. If an argument is valid, it is a valid deduction, and if its premises are sxindon, the conclusion must be true: My library Help Advanced Book Search. No eBook available Amazon. Argument and Argumentation has been prepared by the textbook authors.


critical thinking argument and argumentation jean saindon

Find a copy in the library Finding libraries that hold this item Also note that in the argument above, the statement, “fred’s cat has fleas” is up for debate i. However, formatting rules can vary widely between applications and fields of interest or study. In philosophy, “arguments” are those statements a person makes in the attempt to convince someone of something, or present reasons for accepting a given conclusion. The authors present the content in a modular format, allowing instructors the flexibility to use the book in a variety of ways, for a range of audiences and classes.

Jean Saindon received his honours B. The text contains not only the traditional critical thinking topics but also materials on writing and argumentation.

Don’t have an account? Please enter your name. If the premises of an inductive argu,ent are assumed true, is it probable the conclusion is also true? An argument by analogy may use a particular truth in a premise to argue towards a similar particular truth in the conclusion.

For instance we consider the famous tweedy example:

Author: admin