3.4 Common Argument Patterns

Arguments come in various flavors, each with its own logical structure and purpose. Deductive arguments aim for certainty, while inductive ones deal in probability. Understanding these patterns helps us analyze and construct stronger arguments.

Common argument patterns include modus ponens, syllogisms, and analogical reasoning. These structures form the building blocks of logical thinking, enabling us to draw conclusions from premises and make informed decisions in various contexts.

Argument Types

Deductive and Inductive Arguments

Top images from around the web for Deductive and Inductive Arguments

• 

  Logical Appeals | Boundless Communications View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Inductive and Deductive Reasoning | English Composition 1 View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Free Pearson's Red Critical Thinking PowerPoint Diagram - Free PowerPoint Templates ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Logical Appeals | Boundless Communications View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Inductive and Deductive Reasoning | English Composition 1 View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Deductive and Inductive Arguments

• 

  Logical Appeals | Boundless Communications View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Inductive and Deductive Reasoning | English Composition 1 View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Free Pearson's Red Critical Thinking PowerPoint Diagram - Free PowerPoint Templates ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Logical Appeals | Boundless Communications View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Inductive and Deductive Reasoning | English Composition 1 View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Deductive arguments aim to provide conclusive support for their conclusions
• Deductive reasoning moves from general premises to specific conclusions
• Inductive arguments offer probable support for their conclusions
• Inductive reasoning moves from specific observations to general conclusions
• Validity and soundness apply to deductive arguments
• Strength and cogency apply to inductive arguments

Other Argument Types

• Abductive arguments infer the most likely explanation from a set of observations
• Abductive reasoning often used in scientific hypotheses and medical diagnoses
• Analogical arguments draw conclusions based on similarities between cases
• Analogical reasoning compares known situations to unfamiliar ones
• Causal arguments establish relationships between causes and effects
• Causal reasoning identifies factors that produce or prevent certain outcomes

Deductive Argument Patterns

Modus Ponens and Modus Tollens

• Modus ponens (affirming the antecedent) follows the structure:
  • If P, then Q
  • P
  • Therefore, Q
• Modus ponens example: If it rains, the ground will be wet. It is raining. Therefore, the ground will be wet
• Modus tollens (denying the consequent) follows the structure:
  • If P, then Q
  • Not Q
  • Therefore, not P
• Modus tollens example: If it's sunny, I'll go to the beach. I'm not going to the beach. Therefore, it's not sunny

Syllogisms

• Categorical syllogisms consist of three categorical propositions
• Major premise, minor premise, and conclusion form the structure of syllogisms
• Valid syllogism example:
  • All mammals are warm-blooded (major premise)
  • All dogs are mammals (minor premise)
  • Therefore, all dogs are warm-blooded (conclusion)
• Syllogisms can be valid or invalid based on their logical structure
• Venn diagrams often used to visually represent and analyze syllogisms

Inductive Argument Patterns

Generalization and Inference

• Generalization draws broad conclusions from specific instances or samples
• Statistical generalization uses data from a sample to infer properties of a larger population
• Hasty generalization occurs when conclusions are drawn from insufficient evidence
• Inference to the best explanation selects the most likely hypothesis from multiple possibilities
• Occam's Razor principle often applied in inference to the best explanation

Analogical and Causal Reasoning

• Analogical reasoning compares similar cases to draw conclusions about unfamiliar situations
• Strength of analogical arguments depends on relevance and number of similarities
• Analogical reasoning example: Comparing Earth's climate to Venus to understand global warming
• Causal reasoning identifies relationships between events or phenomena
• Types of causal relationships include necessary causes, sufficient causes, and contributory causes
• Causal fallacies to avoid: post hoc ergo propter hoc, confusing correlation with causation