Page 166 - Smart Thinking: Skills for Critical Understanding and Writing, 2nd Ed

ANSWERS, DISCUSSION, AND FURTHER ADVICE 15 3

d John is a fully qualified lawyer because he passed his final exams. (Change of
order.)
e Many tourists come to Australia because Australia has great natural beauty
and a marvellous climate. (Change of order.)

Exercise 3.2

Here are two possible answers, with the linking words in italics.
1 You should drive more carefully because of the fact that wet roads increase
the risk of accident and the road is indeed wet. [The word 'indeed' may or
may not be some sort of signal that this claim is a premise linked to the
conclusion; it suggests that the truth of the claim 'the road is wet' is very
obvious. In reasoning we use better known or accepted claims as the premises
to prove a less obvious one.]
2 Can you not see that you should drive more carefully? I mean the road is
wet and we know that wet roads increase the risk of accident. [The conclusion
has been expressed as a rhetorical question; as a standard claim, it would read
'You must see that you should drive more carefully'.]

Exercise 3.3

The order of the claims in the structure is more logical, especially when cross-
referenced to the diagram, which shows the sequence of arguments. The claims are
written without pronouns, so each is meaningful in and of itself. The arrows and
other symbols in the diagram show the specific links between claims, rather than
being hidden in the narrative flow. The claims in the analytical structure are self-
contained: you don't need to read any other claim to know what each means
whereas in the narrative flow, you do.

Exercise 3.4

a (I should not buy a car at the moment) 1. (I have just lost my driver's licence)
2 and, besides, (I cannot afford it) 3.

There are no link words that might signal the conclusion or premises. However,
of the three claims, claim 1 is the obvious conclusion. If claims 2 or 3 were the