I would like to continue our discussion of the analysis of an argument by looking at two more important aspects
I would like to continue our discussion of the analysis of an argument by looking at two more important aspects of an author’s written work. Chapter 4 in the ARQ text asks the critical question, “What words or phrases are ambiguous?” and Chapter 5 addresses the question, “What are the value and descriptive assumptions?”
Before we can react to an author’s argument we must understand the precise meaning of important words and phrases. You cannot judge the strength of an argument if you do not know for sure what the author means.
A word or phrase is ambiguous if the meaning is unclear. If an alternative definition of a word or phrase would change the meaning of the discourse that word or phrase is ambiguous.
Sometimes ambiguity is intentional. We see this in advertising. Consider this ad for an issue of “People” magazine. Read “People” to find out about the year’s most intriguing personalities. Intriguing personality is an ambiguous term, one that can have multiple meanings. Intriguing personalities could refer to the year’s award-winning authors. It could refer to inventors, athletes, actors or numerous other individuals. As a consumer, you would want to know more about just what you would find in the magazine before you could decide if you should purchase it. The English language is full of abstract terms that can be ambiguous. Terms such as best, worst, more, less, happiness, freedom, obscenity, and violence are some examples. If an author uses terms such as these as a part of his argument, it is his responsibility to define them adequately so the reader can understand the precise meaning the author had in mind.
It is also important to know how to find ambiguity in an author’s argument.
One of the first steps you should take in determining ambiguity is to look for key terms in the issue and reasoning structure. If the ambiguity is not part of the argument (the issue, conclusion, and reasons) then it is not important and does not warrant questioning or further investigation.
Look for the kind of abstract terms that were mentioned earlier. These terms need further explanation and clarification.
Another strategy is to reverse role play. Ask yourself, how would I define this term if I disagreed with the author’s position.
Finally, look for instances when an alternative definition would change the meaning of the discourse.
Once you have identified ambiguity in an argument you must then try to determine its meaning. The context in which the word or phrase is used will by your guide. There are three elements to consider when using context to help you clarify meaning. First, think about the author’s background and how it might influence the meaning assigned to the phrase. Next, take into account the way the term is traditionally used in relation to the controversy being discussed. And finally, consider the statements surrounding the ambiguity for possible clues to the intended meaning.
As you search for the meaning of terms to clarify possible ambiguities you will probably come into contact with three forms of definitions. Definitions can come in the form of synonyms, examples, and specific criteria.
For critical reading, the best kind of definition will be the ones that provide the specific criteria for usage. This will enable the reader to determine the meaning intended by the author and use that information to decide whether or not to accept or reject the author’s position. If the author does not provide these criteria the reader should ignore those reasons containing the ambiguous terms.
The dictionary will often provide definitions in the form of synonyms and examples and incomplete specifications of criteria. Although dictionaries can be helpful they may not provide an adequate definition appropriate for the argument being made by the author.
While “welfare” may carry a negative connotation, “assistance to the poor” seems like an honorable undertaking. Terms with similar definitions can evoke different reactions from people. Terms and phrases have both denotative and connotative meanings. Denotative meaning refers to the agreed upon explicit descriptive referents for use of the word, while connotative meaning refers to the emotional associations one has to a term or phrase.
As a critical thinker, you must be careful to examine all ambiguous terms for both meanings and not be fooled into accepting or rejecting an argument based on an emotional reaction to the author’s language.
The next critical question that we will ask when critically analyzing an author’s argument will be addressed in Chapter 5 of your ARQ text. What are the value and descriptive assumptions?
Assumptions are the underlying unstated ideas or beliefs of the author that support the explicit reasoning. These are the ideas that hold the argument together. You can not fully understand the argument until you identify the underlying assumptions.
During our analysis of an argument, we will be looking at two kinds of assumptions. The first is the value assumption and the second is the descriptive assumption. Both types of assumptions have certain qualities. Assumptions are unstated ideas, taken for granted, ideas that influence the conclusion, and are necessary for the reasoning to make sense.
A list of common values includes concepts such as generosity, honesty, justice, tolerance, and wisdom. These are examples of abstract ideas that someone believes are worthwhile and strives to achieve. They represent standards of conduct that one endorses and expects people to meet, and they are beliefs that greatly affect one’s opinion on ethical issues. Many people share these values. To find an author’s value assumption you must determine the relative intensity with which the author holds specific values. A value assumption is an implicit preference for one value over another in a particular context. We use value preferences and value priorities as synonyms.
There are many situations in which pairs of values collide or conflict. When you encounter one of these controversies you will be confronted with a value conflict.
For example consider the question: Should you tell your parents about your brother’s drug habit? Inherent in this controversy is the value conflict of loyalty vs. honesty. If you are aware of the problem and your brother has asked you to keep his confidence, you may think that loyalty to your brother is the most important value. However, if you believe that your parents’ help is needed to solve the problem and that they have a right to know you may believe that honesty is the best policy in this situation.
Controversies such as Do you support the grading system? And Should divorces be easily available represent the value conflicts of competition vs. cooperation and tradition vs. novelty respectively? To take a stand on any of these issues you must make a value judgment. In other words, you will uphold one value while depreciating the other. When you recognize an author’s value preference you have found the value assumption in his argument.
When reading arguments dealing with controversial issues you will need to ask yourself what the author value or think is important, and what the opposition value or think is important. Once you have identified the value conflict you can determine the author’s value preference based on the position he takes. This is a challenging step in the analysis process because the author does not state the value conflict or his value preference. You will not find this written in the argument. You will have to infer it from the reasoning and conclusion provided.
………………Answer Preview………………
The issue
The issues in this discussion are the words or phrases that are ambiguous and value and descriptive assumptions. The author begins the discussion by stating that it is difficult to judge the strength of an argument without understanding what the author means. This factor is brought about by the author’s ambiguity, which makes it very hard for the readers to understand what he or she is saying.
Author’s conclusion and reasons
The author’s conclusion is how to identify these concepts in arguments. This……………….
APA
630 Words
