The Process of Mastering Or Improving Most Skills Usually Requires Learning Terms That

Statements 1

The process of mastering or improving most skills usually requires learning terms that allows us to describe more accurately the skills and the things to which we apply those skills. Just think of the specialized vocabulary of someone who is a skilled mechanic, cook, dancer, seamstress, or musician. Similarly, in order to improve our reasoning skills we will need to master a vocabulary that will help us to describe precisely our reasoning, the standards to evaluate our reasoning, and the techniques to apply those standards. However, I will attempt as much as possible to use words that already exist in plain English, and to avoid any technical language. This will help you to tap into the knowledge, experience, and reasoning skills you already have. Moreover, a common non-technical vocabulary will facilitate communication and informal instruction among people discussing issues. In many respects we are all one another’s teachers; so if we use a simple, clear, precise, and common vocabulary, we increase our chances of not misleading, intimidating, or annoying one another, thus increase our chances of learning well from one another. If we are to rationally open one another’s minds, we should avoid all unnecessary technical mumbo jumbo, abracadabra, and hocus-pocus. However, we will need to fine-tune our use of a few familiar terms, and to learn a few new ones.

The first units of this book will focus on some fundamental skills of three broad groups of skills: the interpretation, construction, and evaluation of arguments. These three groups are extremely important because they affect the quality of our decisions, and the quality of our decisions affect the emotional, physical, financial, interpersonal and spiritual quality of our lives. Consider the many daily arguments people advance to justify or rationalize decisions in their lives, e.g., whether to buy a house, marry someone, continue or end a relationship, purchase an item, convert to or abandon a religion, join or renounce a political party, vote for someone, put on shorts or long pants, contribute to a charity, exercise an extra fifteen minutes, start a conversation with someone, judge someone to be competent or foolish, insult or praise someone, eat fruit or pastry, read a challenging book or watch TV, etc. Of course, the consequences of our daily decisions have different degrees of effect on the quality of our daily lives, but most of them do impact it.

Where we are right now in our lives is a consequence of mainlyour very own past and current decisions, e.g., the debt you are in is a consequence of many past decisions. Our character is the consequence of mainly our very own decisions, for behavioral, mental, and emotional habits begin with a decision to act or think in a certain way. Evidently our responsibility for our quality of life does not extend to matters that are beyond our control, e.g., sickness due to genetic inheritance. However, the way we respond emotionally and act toward where we are right now in our lives is a consequence of mainly our very own decisions. For instance, we can choose to see a current problem as a challenge to meet, and as a result feel encouraged, or we can choose to see it as insurmountable bad luck, and as a result feel discouraged and victimized; we can choose to be grateful for the little that we have, and thus feel content, or choose to be ungrateful toward our abundance, and thus feel unsatisfied despite our abundance.

Before we can begin improving the skills of interpreting, constructing, and evaluating arguments, we must clarify our notion of argument. The word “argument” is sometimes used to mean a “heated disagreement” or “quarrel”. I will not be using it in that sense. Before attempting to clarify a word, it is often helpful to identify the contexts or situations to which it applies or where it is used: think of the arguments that lawyers present to judges, the arguments among scientists evaluating an experiment or a theory, the arguments among art or music critics, everyday discussions on morality, religion, education, sex, politics, happiness, etc.

When clarifying an idea, it is also very valuable to begin with some clear and obvious examples of that idea. Here are some representative examples of simple arguments in which I identify their different parts:

1. We should keep our words sweet[Statement used as a conclusion.]

because[Reason indicator: introduces reasons.]

we never know when we might have to eat them. [Statement used as a reason.]

2. We should learn from the mistakes of others; [Statement used as a conclusion.]

for [Reason indicator: introduces reasons.]

we can’t live long enough to make them all by ourselves. [Statement used as a reason.]

3. We will have to spend the rest of our lives in the future, [Statement used as a reason.]

so[Conclusion indicator: introduces conclusions.]

we should all be concerned about it. [Statement used as a conclusion.]

From these three simple examples, the many others ones that we have used or encountered in our lives, and the different contexts where we find them, we can propose a working definition:

ARGUMENT: It consists of (a) a finite number of statements, called the “reasons”, or “premises”,

(b)used to support the truth or acceptability of another statement, named the “conclusion”,

(i) convince someone to believe that something is true or acceptable, or

convince someone to do something, or

convince someone to adopt a particular attitude; or

(ii) diminish or increase doubt; or

(iii) resolve a disagreement or conflict; or

(iv) explore or test the truth, probability, or acceptability of claims.

We can have other goals in mind when drawing a conclusion from reasons, but these four general goals are the most common ones. This working definition of “argument” implies that an argument must have at least two statements.

Acceptability, Imperative Sentences, Prescriptive Claims

You may be wondering why I assert that reasons are used to support the truth or acceptability of a conclusion. The main reason for this is that if we limit conclusions to only those claims that can be true, we will restrict our use of “claim”, “statement”, and “assertion” to only descriptive claims, which are claims about this physical world or other possible worlds, and which are usually expressed in declarative sentences. As a result, our notion of arguments will apply to only those cases where reasons are advanced in support of descriptive claims. But we humans also spend a lot of time and energy reasoning about claims that prescribe (order, suggest, implore, etc.) behavior or attitudes, which is why we call them prescriptive claims, e.g., “Do not cheat” or “We should not cheat”. Prescriptive (and value) claims are extremely important because the quality of our lives depends the kinds of prescriptive (and value claims) on which we choose to act. So, if we limit our notion of claim to descriptive claims, we limit our study of arguments: we will not critically examine the many arguments in which reasons are advanced in support of prescriptive (or value) claims. Such a consequence is intellectually and morally unacceptable. So, since arguments are constructed from statements, and we want to improve our reasoning ability concerning all arguments, we must define “statement”, “claim”, and “assertion” in a way that includes prescriptive (and value) claims.

But how does the notion of acceptability get into our working definition of “argument”? Though the notions of truth and falsity apply to descriptive claims, they do not apply to prescriptive claims. For if we take any descriptive claim, e.g., “Envy eats one’s own heart”, it makes perfect sense to say, “It can be either true or false that envy eats one’s own heart”; but if we take any prescriptive claim, e.g., “Plant pears for your heirs”, it does not make any sense to say, “It can be true or false that plant pears for your heirs”. However, prescriptive claims can be either acceptable or unacceptable (relative to certain moral, medical, practical, legal, religious, philosophical, etc. criteria). Consequently, when we are arguing about a prescriptive claim, that is, when we are presenting one or more reasons to support a prescriptive claim, we are advancing reasons in support of its acceptability, not its truth.

When the goal of an argument is to convince someone to do an action or to adopt an attitude, the prescriptive conclusion of that argument can be a command, advice, instruction, or suggestion, etc. and is expressed in an imperative sentence. Here is an incomplete list of the many things we can do with imperative sentences:

Implore, beg, appeal, plead: To a person in authority: “Please grant me mercy!”.

Order: Sergeant disciplining a private: “Do 60 pushups now!”.

Demand: To an obnoxious sales person: “Get out of my house!”.

Solicit: To a stranger before national elections: “Vote for the Bumbling Babbling Bimbo party!”.

Entreat (Ask someone earnestly or anxiously to do something): To a reluctant banker: “Please lend me the money I need!”.

Exhort: (Strongly encourage or urge) To lazy students: “Prepare for the exams!”.

Instruct, enjoin: Follow the guidelines very carefully.

Compel (Force or oblige to do something), pressure: Under moral pressure of one’s conscience: “Avoid those self-destructive thoughts!”.

Coerce: Under gunpoint: “Give me your money!”.

Direct: To a lost tourist: “Go straight ahead for two miles”.

Suggest: To a flabby spouse: “Let’s go hiking in the mountains this weekend”.

Propose: To the members of a committee: “Let’s consider the best opposing view to our position”.

As these sentences illustrate, all imperative sentences are used to prescribe behavior or an attitude, and for this reason we will call them prescriptive claims (statements, or assertions). NOTE that most sentences using such words as “ought”, e.g., “We ought to help them out”, and “should”, e.g., “I should do more physical exercise”, are also prescriptive claims. Whenever one or more reasons are advanced to support the acceptability of an imperative sentence (prescriptive claim), we have an argument.

Given the above working definition of “argument”, all arguments are constructed from statements. So, in order to identify, interpret, and evaluate arguments we must be able to identify statements, and to distinguish them from non-statements in written passages and in conversations.

STATEMENT:

(a) a group of words (expressed in a declarative or imperative sentence, or in a rhetorical question)

(b)used to assert (claim, affirm, declare, propose)

(c) a proposition: what can be either true or false, either acceptable or unacceptable, or have some degree of likelihood (probability) or some degree of acceptability.

Whenever we make a statement, we commit ourselves to the truth or to some degree of probability of a proposition, or to the acceptability or to some degree of acceptability of a proposition; we allege that a proposition is true or has some probability, we allege that a proposition is acceptable or has some degree of acceptability. Other words commonly used instead of “statement” are “claim” and “assertion”; less commonly used are “declaration” and “affirmation”. We need to note that statements occur in a context where sentences are used to express one’s commitment to the truth, acceptability, or likelihood of a proposition. For instance, the declarative sentence, “Hairless neurotic kangaroos play soccer on Mars”, can be true or false, but this sentence by itself is not a statement. It becomes one if one USES the sentence to claim that it is true that hairless neurotic kangaroos play soccer on Mars. As this example proves, not every declarative sentence is a statement, not every proposition is a statement (for not every proposition is asserted, especially silly ones like this one!) However, every statement can be expressed in a declarative sentence. For instance, if someone asks you, “How do feel about successfully completing this course?”, and you sincerely respond with a single word, “Confident!”, your answer is a condensed version of the statement that you feel confident about successfully completing this course, which can be expressed in the declarative sentence “I feel confident about successfully completing this course!”.

The Identification of Statements

Suppose someone asserts the following: “A tower of nine stories begins with a heap of earth. A journey of a thousand miles starts from beneath your feet” (Lao Tse, 604-531 B.C.). How do we identify the statements? We will use angle brackets and numbers as follows: (1)<A tower of nine stories begins with a heap of earth>. (2)<A journey of a thousand miles starts from beneath your feet>. We will follow the convention of numbering statements in the order in which they are presented. In this particular example each statement corresponds exactly to a declarative sentence: there are two declarative sentences, and two statements. However, this sort of correspondence between a declarative sentence and a statement will not always occur. So if we are to determine whether sentences or groups of words are used to make statements, we must focus on the meaning expressed by sentences in the context of their use, and not limit our interpretation to the mere grammatical features of those sentences. For example, assuming the proper context and commitment, what are the statements in the following passage, “Study depends on the goodwill of the student, a quality that cannot be secured by compulsion” (Quintilian, 35-100 A.D.)? Here there is a single sentence, but it contains two statements: (1)<Study depends on the goodwill of the student>, (2)<[study is] a quality that cannot be secured by compulsion>. For both (1) and (2) can be true or false (i.e., both are propositions), and we are assuming that Quintilian was committed to the truth of (1) and (2). Note that I add the square brackets “[“ and “]”, and write between them what is unstated (unexpressed, hidden, implicit, tacit, missing) but suggested by the use of such a sentence. We will also use this convention to identify what is unstated throughout the book.

Sentences, Propositions, Statements

(a) How many sentences?

(b) What kind of sentence is each one? (declarative, imperative, interrogatory, exclamatory)

(d) Assuming the proper context where these sentences are correctly used, how many propositions are asserted, in other words, how many statements are there? You might need to re-phrase the sentence.

1. Advanced minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Simple minds discuss people. (Eleanor Roosevelt) (a) (b) (c) (d)

2. We are always getting ready to live, but never living. (Emerson) (a) (b) (c) (d)

3. You reap what you sow. (a) (b) (c) (d)

4. Intelligence is about making good decisions based on imperfect or incomplete information.

(a) (b) (c) (d)

5. Intelligence is about making good decisions based on imperfect and incomplete information.

(a) (b) (c) (d)

6. If you want to see time fly, then borrow money for 30 days. (a) (b) (c) (d)

7. Be patient with everyone and yourself. (a) (b) (c) (d)

8. Either s/he is patient with everyone or with him/herself. (a) (b) (c) (d)

9. S/he is patient with everyone or with him/herself. (a) (b) (c) (d)

10. The teacher opens the door, but the student must enter by him/herself. (a) (b) (c) (d)

11. Epicure 341-271B.C.) said that empty is a philosopher’s argument that does not relieve pain.

(a) (b) (c) (d)

12. If you hate injustice, lust, tyranny, and greed, then hate those things in yourself first. (M.K.Ghandi)

(a) (b) (c) (d)

13. Examine what is said, not the person who says it. (Arabic proverb) (a) (b) (c) (d)

14. Either examine what is said, or the person who says it. (a) (b) (c) (d)

15. If one wins the rat race, one is still a rat, so one’s participation in the rat race is problematic.

(a) (b) (c) (d)

16. A teacher affects eternity, for s/he can never tell where his/her influence stops. (Henry Adams)

(a) (b) (c) (d)

17. What wonderful students! (a) (b) (c) (d)

18. What “wonderful” students would do such a thing? (a) (b) (c) (d)

19. My students are so wonderful! (a) (b) (c) (d)

COMPARE & CONTRAST the following four sets of sentences:

20. I will succeed. As I study regularly. (a) (b) (c) (d)

21. Will I not succeed? For am I not studying regularly? (a) (b) (c) (d)

22. I will succeed because I study regularly. (a) (b) (c) (d)

23. I will succeed because of my regular studying. (a) (b) (c) (d)