Arts Faculty » Philosophical, Historical & International Studies » Philosophy » Research » Monash Critical Thinking Study » Standard «

The Monash Critical Thinking Study

Sample Teaching Materials: Standard Course

Lab 3 Student Handout

Types of premisses

Independent
Codependent premisses

Independent premisses are justifications that support the conclusions without relying on each other. So you could technically split the argument into two and the conclusion would still follow logically in each separate argument (See excerpt 1)

Co-dependent premisses on the other hand rely on each other jointly to support the conclusion. What this means is that if you try to split the argument into two; each one of the premisses alone would not be sufficient to provide a justification for the conclusion. They would however be sufficient to support the conclusion if you combined them.

The following excerpts are from Peter Singer's text. Do a full analysis of the excerpts.

Some key questions to guide you in your analysis

Identify the conclusion
What is the main point of the passage?
[A simple technique to practice: If I had to condense this paragraph or text into one sentence, what would I say?]
Identify the premisses
What are the reasons or justifications the author provides for his case?
Identify the types of premisses in each argument - are they independent or codependent?
How are the premisses related to each other and to the conclusion
How would you represent the two different types of premisses when you are writing out the argument?

Excerpt 1 -- Pg 37
Bush might have done more to create jobs if … mostly to the rich.

Excerpt 2 -- Pg 57
The problem with this defense of capital punishment is that most of the evidence … incidence of homicide.

Excerpt 3 -- Pg 88
Among the ways in which Bush appointees have thwarted proper enforcement … made to flow through the industry.

Part II

Your tutor will break you up into small groups and give you selections from pg 45 -53 of Peter Singer's text for analysis before bringing you together for a discussion as a class.

Use the same questions as those in part 1 to guide you in your analysis.

Homework Assignment 3

Assessment Task 3: Argument Evaluation
Your written work will be assessed on the general assessment criteria.

Part One: /20
Answer the following 20 multiple-choice questions on the answer sheet provided.

(20 LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions on making correct inferences from given information..)

Part Two: /10
For questions 1 and 2, explain why the right answer is correct and each wrong option is mistaken.

Part Three: /20
Your examples can be sourced from anywhere, except "Elements".

Use argument examples to explain the difference between the criteria of strength and the criteria of relevance. (10 marks)
Give an example of an ambiguous use of a term. (10 marks)

Part Four: /20

Compare the following argument from Chapter six Sharing the World, with the speciesist argument from Chapter 4 The Freest Nation in the World (p49).

George W. Bush, when asked what he would do about global warming said, "We will not do anything that harms our economy, because first things first are the people who live in America"(p160). Asked whether the president would call on drivers to reduce their fuel consumption, the White House press secretary, Ari Fleischer, replied: "That's a big no. The President believes that it's an American way of life, and that it should be a goal of policy makers to protect the American way of life. The American way of life is a blessed one"(p160).

- How would you interpret the White House's position? (5 marks)
- Represent the justification of this position concisely. (5 marks)
- How sufficient is this justification? (5 marks)
- Using the criteria for argument success, evaluate the strength of the argument. You may evaluate the accuracy of your own interpretation in addition to this. (5 marks)

Part Five: /30

Singer develops a fairly complex counter argument to the White House position. Interpret and represent his major argument. To do this you'll need to use his sub-conclusions from the minor arguments occurring in various paragraphs between pp158-168. (10 marks)
Choose one of his sub-arguments and explore the following:

- Represent his justification for this counter position. (5 marks)
- How sufficient is this justification? (5 marks)
- Using the criteria for argument success, explain how Singer's argument undermines the truth and/or the justification of the White House's individual claims and or position. (10 marks)