The concept I thought was the most interesting and helpful would be the points that the book gives about how to check for validity in a diagram. A valid argument would be that the premises is true and there is no way for the conclusion to be false at the same time.
- A collection is represented by an enclosed area
- If one area is entirely within another, then everything in the one collection is also in the other
- If one overlaps another, then there is something that is common to both collection
- If two areas do no overlap, then there is nothing common to both collections.
- An “a” or a dot in an area marks that a particular object is in that collection
These were the pointers that the book gave to help us check for validity. This diagram helps by making you analyze the argument. We can use these diagrams to decide whether or not a premise is true. This comes in handy when writing any type of argument.
Good post. I'm using the same topic though I'm giving examples to explain it. But, I can't post it yet since it hasn't been 12 hours past since I last posted. LOL I like it this topic though because it shows you the difference of the argument if its valid or not valid just like the given examples from the text:
ReplyDeleteAll dogs bark.
Ralph is a dog.
So Ralph barks.
This would be valid because it states that Ralph is a dog and concludes Ralph barks.
As for this example,
All dogs bark.
Ralph barks.
So Ralph is a dog.
This would be weak because the argument is overlooking possibilities. Even if Ralph barks, it doesn't mean that Ralph is dog. Ralph could be a person or something else.
This concept was very interesting, indeed! The way the textbook describes this ideal of figuring out how to distinguish whether or not an argument is valid really helps the reather to do just that in the way they illustrate it. The Validity Diagram creates an incredibly visual image in your mind, and can be put into good use to draw as it describes, and how it is shown in your post through bullets, with any argument told. The diagram is very specific and seems to cover mostly every aspect that is needed to be covered when dealing with the questionability or begging the question of an argument. Really great post!
ReplyDelete