{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

3 from a letter to national geographic november 1998

Info iconThis preview shows pages 2–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
3. [From a letter to National Geographic , November 1998] The laboratory where I am a consultant obtained a hair sample of an alleged 1,200-year-old Peruvian mummy. Our analysis revealed levels of lead, cadmium, and aluminum 5 to 13 times higher than would be acceptable in the typical patient of today . . . consensus was that he received the contaminants from improperly glazed clay pottery. This seems to be a report of scientific findings, but there is no obvious premise–conclusion relationship to the statements presented. No reason is given, for example, for why they decided that the mummy received the contaminants from improperly glazed pottery. Therefore, it is not an argument. 5. [From PC Gamer , December 2002]. In Battlefield 1942, airpower is a strong weapon, . . . but it comes with high dangers. Ground-based anti-aircraft guns can chop you to pieces with flak, and enemy fighters are a constant dogfighting threat. But when you land your payloads, it’s a devastating blow to the enemy. This advertisement begins with a significant claim to distinguish Battlefield 1942 from other action games. But, again, no evidence is provided to support the claim. What we have is a description of the game’s features. Exercise 4D Identify any argument (or explanation) indicators in the following passages. Put the reasoning in each case into “X, therefore Y” (or “Y because X”) form and discuss whether it is an explanation and/or an argument. In the case of arguments, identify the premises and conclusion. b) Drugs should be legal because the attempt to ban them creates more problems than it solves. “Because” works here as a premise indicator, because the statement that precedes it (drugs should be legal) is a controversial claim that needs to be defended as a conclusion rather than explained. The statement that follows “because” serves as a reason for the conclusion.
Background image of page 2

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Good Reasoning Matters! A Constructive Approach to Critical Thinking, Fifth Edition © Oxford University Press Canada, 2012 h) [From Peter King’s web site http://users.ox.ac.uk/~worc0337/note.html, accessed 19 December 2002] The smug and offensive (and ignorant) tone of this [comment from another web site] gets up my nose, and is a sure-fire way of ensuring that I don’t include a link to the site in question. Here, that King does not include a link to the site in question is already known. What stands to be explained is why there is no link. Thus, his reaction to what he takes to be smugness and an offensive tone serves as an explanation for that decision. There are no indicator words. Exercise 4E Identify the arguments reported in the following argument narratives: c) [From Xinhua, 13 April 2007, http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-04/13/content _5971431.htm] In the 1993 Oscar-award-winning movie “Jurassic Park” and again in the 2001 “Jurassic Park III” flick Sam Neill, portraying the character of dinosaur expert Dr Alan Grant, expounds the theory dinosaurs really never went extinct, they
Background image of page 3
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page2 / 6

3 From a letter to National Geographic November 1998 The...

This preview shows document pages 2 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon bookmark
Ask a homework question - tutors are online