Page 47 - Smart Thinking: Skills for Critical Understanding and Writing, 2nd Ed
P. 47

34  SMART THINKING: SKILLS FOR CRITICAL UNDERSTANDING & WRITING
      1   Decide what your conclusion will be. Write this claim out carefully,
          expressing exactly what you mean. Number it T \
      2   Then think about the reasons that you are giving for this conclusion. These
          reasons must be written as proper claims, this time serving as premises that
          either explain how that conclusion comes about or show why it should be
          accepted. Try to keep related premises together, but as the diagram will show
          these relationships clearly, it is not essential to group them perfectly. Write
          them out, making sure that you do not use pronouns but express each claim
          so that it makes sense in and of itself. Number them from '2 ' onwards. Focus
          on giving the main reasons for the conclusion at this stage.
      3   Begin to draw the diagram to show the relationships between the claims. At
          this stage the key point is to realise that the symbols you draw in the diagram
          do not make the reasoning. They are, instead, a representation of the implied
          links that come from the way you have constructed your claims. Use the line
          underneath a group of related premises; use the arrow to show a premise-to-
          conclusion relationship.
      4   Stop and think: are you missing any claims? do you need more premises? have
          you got the relationships the way you want them to be?
      5   Make changes if required, adding claims and redrawing the diagram if need
          be. If necessary, repeat step 4.
         Here are five important points to remember when doing this process:

          Each claim must stand on its own. Do not include pronouns that refer to
          nouns elsewhere in the argument. Thus, 'Illegal immigrants are treated badly
          in Australia is a well-written claim, whereas 'They are treated badly in
          Australia is not—who are the 'they' referred to here?
          Do not include signals of reasoning in claims: 'Therefore illegal immigrants
          are treated badly in Australia' is not a proper claim—the word 'therefore' does
          not belong since the diagram will show that this claim is the conclusion.
          Each claim must imply links to other claims which, when added together,
          show the reasoning. 'Refugees are treated badly in Australia' and 'Australia
          violates international human rights treaties' don't connect with one another
          unless there are other claims. The word Australia appears in both, but other
          claims involving internal connections between, say, refugees and international
          human rights must also be included.
          You cannot use the symbols (the line and arrow) for just any purpose.
          Simply drawing extra arrows or lines does not work: the relationships
          signalled by these symbols must be there already in the claims.
          Do not be afraid to revise and rewrite. Changing the wording of the claims,
          moving them around so they fit together logically is the reason you do this
          process. It is called 'iteration'—you do one version, review it, see if it makes
          sense, and, if not, you change it and review again.
         In later chapters we will explore the subtleties of this process; for now, practise
      the method as you understand it at the moment.
   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52