A WORKBOOK FOR ARGUMENTS- A Complete Course in Critical Thinking by David R. Morrow & Anthony Weston
‘A WORKBOOK FOR ARGUMENTS’- A Complete Course in Critical Thinking by David R. Morrow & Anthony Weston is a complete guidebook on presenting an argument while writing or during a debate. This book encompasses all the strategies to consider while writing an argumentative article. It helps the readers prepare themselves with the background knowledge and studies before presenting their viewpoints. The authors have enlisted a few rules to be followed in a logical argument. The chapter about Extended Arguments focuses on a critical analogy to resolve real-world problems through a series of well-derived suggestive methodology with strong theoretical underpinnings.
Starting with a problem rather than a stance, the authors narrated that one need not sense obligated to instantly choose a stance and subsequently seek to defend it with reasons. Similarly, especially if one understands a point of view, do not just throw out the initial statement that comes to mind. Individuals are rarely getting questioned on the initial thought that comes to mind. One must establish a defined perspective that can be supported by sound reasoning. Is it possible for species to exist on other planetary bodies? Several researchers propose the following course of reasoning. All have been learning that numerous planets have their planetary networks (Morrow & Weston 2011, p.156). However, the universe has hundreds of millions of planets and hundreds of billions more clusters throughout the universe. Although just a percentage of these thousands of solar systems contain worlds suited for species, and only a portion of them contain life, there should be many planetary bodies containing life. The range of alternatives remains incalculably large. However, many people express hesitations about life on other planets. Several researchers argue that humans lack a way of knowing if frequently suitable planets are present or how feasible life can arise on those. This is simply a guessing game. Others contend that life outside earth should have proclaimed itself already, something scientists claim has not yet occurred. Each of the above points is valid, but there is certainly further to be stated. When one investigates and constructs the argument, they may foresee that unanticipated information or views. The authors suggest that one must be pleasantly astonished and receive facts and arguments supporting opinions that one might disagree with. The person stating facts should be willing to be influenced, although if they do not want to. Objective reasoning is a practice that never ends.
The fundamental concept is that one never realizes when to wind up once one begins. When a person has been allocated a theme and a stance on it, he ought to study multiple reasons for several different points of view—if to be equipped to reply or get much flexibility in developing and ending the one he has been provided. For instance, one does not have to repeat statements that someone has previously listened to several times regarding the most significant divisive subjects. Avoid it, warns the authors. Take a glance at innovative, fresh ideas. One may also attempt to discover a point of agreement from the other party. In essence, it takes time to choose the path and aims to achieve actual development on the subject, though it means working with "assigned" boundaries.
The writers of this book mentioned that always keep in mind building argumentation, which are specific findings supported by research and logic. Consider the preliminary notion of the stance and structure it like an assertion to construct it accordingly. Make a rough sketch of the assumptions and argument on a big piece of paper. Following the methods provided in the chapter, start with brief reasoning and facts. For instance, the fundamental cause for the existence of life on another planet as presented may be placed into the premises-and-conclusions format as follows: Outside this planetary system, there are several others. There might be a chance that more worlds like Earth exist when there are numerous galaxies in the universe besides the one we already know about. If additional planets like Earth are incredibly likely to exist, many of those are likely to host life. As a result, it is quite likely that life exists in distant worlds. Build the argument as logical reasoning combining modus ponens and theoretical reasoning for practice. Take a completely unrelated issue as an analogy. The authors have cited an example; a few have lately recommended a significant increase in student transfer programs (Morrow & Weston 2011, p.160). They believe that several American Children must have the opportunity to go foreign and that many other young foreigners must get the opportunity to visit the United States. It will indeed require funds and require slight modification on everyone's part, but it might help society be very productive and pleasant. Assume that one wishes to flesh out and support this idea. Lay down the fundamental justification for it—the core idea. The need of individuals wants to increase student exchanges. There can be two forms of arguments as informed by the authors; primary argument: Pupils who venture overseas get a greater understanding of diverse cultures. Better understanding amongst nations would be beneficial. As a result, further pupils must be sent overseas. This layout captures a primary notion; however, it is a bit simplistic. It does not express nearly sufficient to qualify as anything other than a basic assumption. Counter-arguments might arise, such as the need for increased understanding among nations. How is this beneficial? Moreover, how does it happen when pupils are sent foreign? Just a simple point may be developed later. Conclusive argument: Children who visit overseas get a greater understanding of various cultures. Learners who visit foreign countries become personal endorsers for their native nations, assisting their guests in appreciating the participants' native country. Increased mutual respect will enable us to thrive and collaborate more effectively in the interconnected environment. As a result, more pupils should be sent overseas.
The authors indicated that one has to defend and enhance the fundamental notion after writing it down as an argumentation. Each of the fundamental assertions will require valid logic for anybody who disagrees and those who do not understand anything about the topic in the initial case. As a result, every assumption represents the result of new reasoning that one must develop. Consider the debate over whether or not there is life on other planets. The reasoning starts with the assumption that several more solar systems exist than this. One can demonstrate this by referencing scholarly publications and press report generation. As a result, there exist several other solar systems than the present. The following postulate in the fundamental argumentation for life on any other world is that if alternative solar systems exist, many contain planets similar to Earth. One almost certainly has to rely on facts or scientific findings in this case (Morrow & Weston 2011, p.165).
Monitor similar media articles, then get specific valid points to make. A comparison is the most standard argument: There is a range of celestial bodies, ranging from huge ones to tiny stony and aquatic worlds suited for life. As much as scientists understood, other solar systems will be similar to the present. As a result, assuming there are more solar systems besides the known, it is pretty likely that more worlds like Earth exist. Proceed in this manner for each of the fundamental comparison's facts. Similarly, gathering relevant scientific proof for every assumption that has to be defended might require some practice, and one may discover themselves revising certain hypotheses, and consequently the central theme altogether, to ensure that these should be sufficiently backed by the types of proof that uncover. Compelling arguments frequently have a "movement" to them, with each portion reliant on the rest. It is all part of the training process. Identically, the speaker has to attack the underlying rationale for student travel programs. Examples might include the findings of questionnaires or investigations that anyone can obtain via study or by contacting the persons who organize such programs in real. Then, in several directions, he has to supply in the assertion. A similar may be said for the following underlying principle: how can one ensure that international students genuinely act as "individual representatives"? The final general concept is less prone to be perplexing or challenged, and one may keep it underdeveloped in specific fast arguments. Nevertheless, it is equally a perfect moment to render the intensity of the argument—the projected incentives.
Perhaps in the following manner: Recognition causes people to perceive qualities in humans' actions and anticipate qualities when they have not seen them before. Recognition is a type of pleasure that enhances one's perspective.
The authors have educated their readers that while people construct points, they frequently focus on the positive flank: anything can be stated in assistance. Opposition is often unexpected. Perhaps a bit too slow, they discovered that they did not adequately think over potential concerns (Morrow & Weston 2011, p.172). It is preferable to handle it personally and fine-tune the argument—possibly including making significant changes—ahead of time. This also communicates to the audience that the speaker had done the background study, adequately researched the topic, and approached it with an unbiased view. Sometimes seemingly beneficial initiatives like growing more crops, being wedded to be happier, or transferring many students overseas may be opposed by intelligent and well-intentioned individuals. Expect genuine worries and sincerely examine them. Pupils studying overseas, for instance, sometimes find themselves in perilous circumstances, and letting in vast groups of additional international students could jeopardize public safety. Also, it may all be costly. These are significant counter-arguments. On the flip side, issues may be addressed. Perhaps one wishes to explain that the expenses are justified, say since there are additional consequences of avoiding venturing across different countries (Morrow & Weston 2011, p.172).
Moreover, more people are now sent to armed services places where they are at grave risk. Some may suggest that projecting a different image overseas would be wise. Several criticisms may cause one to reconsider the reasoning or idea. In such a scenario, for particular, concerns regarding public safety may necessitate caution in deciding who is authorized to visit. Indeed, visitors must arrive; otherwise, how would we be able to rectify erroneous perceptions? It might be reasonable to apply some limitations as well. Perhaps one presents a broad or metaphysical assertion: that people possess the independent choice, that violence is inherently natural, or that life exists in different worlds. Oppositions are expected here as well. Search for challenges of the argument or perspective in the literature reviewed, alternative literature, or internet materials while preparing a scientific article. Sharing thoughts with individuals who hold opposing viewpoints clear many doubts. Filter out the worries and arguments that arise, identify the compelling and prevalent points, and address those (Morrow & Weston 2011, p.175). Also, it has been advised by the authors not to neglect to rethink one's position. If needed, revision and elaboration must be done to present the statements.
According to the writers, people are not flexible with their ideas. So, they suggested an alternative idea must be kept in reserve for convenience. Sometimes is not sufficient to prove that the solution would fix a situation while supporting a plan. One should demonstrate that it is superior to reasonable alternative solutions to the identical situation. The swimming facilities in Durham are sometimes congested, particularly on holidays. As a result, Durham will have to construct additional facilities. This statement is flawed in several aspects. Firstly, the term "congested" is ambiguous: who judges whether a pool is excessively congested? Many persons also might seek out the gatherings for it. However, addressing this flaw will not suffice to validate the result. There should be an alternative, very logical options for dealing with the issue. Perhaps extra accessible sessions should be added to current facilities so that swimmers can disperse themselves out across further convenient periods (Morrow & Weston 2011, p.175). Possibly not; the peak hours might be made more publicly known. Swimming competitions, as well as other pool-confined events, might perhaps be shifted to midweek. Alternatively, Durham may do little and allow consumers to choose their own pool timetables. After so many options, if one believes Durham must construct additional pools, they demonstrate that the idea is superior to all other options. Considering other options is not merely a courtesy. The goal is not merely to rapidly consider a few apparent, readily refuted possibilities before returning to the initial plan. Searching for real solutions and thinking beyond the box is the critical aspect of this rule. Maybe a completely fresh idea comes up. One could require revising the argument if they strike across extremely fantastic stuff. Maybe there may exist far superior methods to manage international exchange programs; for instance, probably similar changes can be extended to all types of individuals, not only academics.