Page 196 - Smart Thinking: Skills for Critical Understanding and Writing, 2nd Ed
P. 196

GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS AND CONCEPTS 18 3
         no matter how many distinct groups of dependent premises there are, such argu-
         ments are not complex. Compare with complex structure. (See chapter 3.)

        source
         Sources can be either direct (primary) or indirect (secondary). The difference
         between them is usually contextual, but generally speaking, direct sources relate to
         the topic of our reasoning; indirect sources relate to what others have reasoned
         about our topic. Obviously, if the topic of our argument or explanation is what
         others have written or said, then what appears to be an indirect source can in fact
         be direct. (See chapter 8.)

         specific cases, reasoning from
        The conclusion generalises beyond the scope of the specific cases in the premises;
         the premises give the evidence regarding those cases. The key question to ask is: do
         these cases give rise to some reliable generalisation that applies to all of them or all
         like cases? (See chapter 7.)
         statement
        The generic name for an ordered, meaningful group of words. Statements may or
         may not be claims. A statement is not a sentence: 'sentence' is a term used to
         describe the narrative flow of words; statement is a term to denote the analytical
         units that make up reasoning. Compare with claim. (See chapter 2.)

         strength of support
         Even acceptable and relevant premises do not always provide sufficient support to
         show or explain their conclusions. Judgments of the necessary strength of support
         needed in reasoning are difficult, since they depend largely on the context in which
         that reasoning is taking place. Compare with burden of proof. (See chapter 6.)
         structure diagram
         One half of the analytical structure format. A structure diagram shows the inter-
         relationship of claims in a standardised way. It is distinguished from the arrangement
         of claims in narrative flow by the fact that, in a diagram, the conclusion is always last
         and the order of claims above it indicates the 'steps' we need to take to reach that
         conclusion from our starting point. The key elements are the [<l] symbol, to show
         premise-conclusion links; the + symbol, to show premise-premise links; and the use
         of horizontal lines (  ), to show grouped chains of premises. (See chapter 3.)

         sub-argument
        Any one component layer of a complex argument. For example, consider an
         argument structure in which claims 2 and 3 support claim 4, which in turn joins
         with claim 5 to support the conclusion—claim 1. The main argument concerns
         claim 1 and so the sub-argument consists in the structure 2+3 [-1] 4. (See
         chapter 3.)
   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201