3.

Deductive, Inductive, and Conductive Arguments

Arguments are commonly classified as deductive or inductive (for example, Copi, I. and C. Cohen 2005,
Sinnott-Armstrong and Fogelin 2010). A deductive argument is an argument that an arguer puts forward
as valid. For a valid argument, it is not possible for the premises to be true with the conclusion false.
That is, necessarily if the premises are true, then the conclusion is true. Thus we may say that the truth
of the premises in a valid argument guarantees that the conclusion is also true. The following is an
example of a valid argument: Tom is happy only if the Tigers win, theTigers lost; therefore, Tom is
definitely not happy.
A step-by-step derivation of the conclusion of a valid argument from its premises is called a proof. In
the context of a proof, the given premises of an argument may be viewed as initial premises. The
propositions produced at the steps leading to the conclusion are called derived premises. Each step in
the derivation is justified by a principle of inference. Whether the derived premises are components of
a valid argument is a difficult question that is beyond the scope of this article.

An inductive argument is an argument that an arguer puts forward as inductively strong. In an inductive
argument, the premises are intended only to be so strong that, if they were true, then it would
be unlikely, although possible, that the conclusion is false. If the truth of the premises makes it unlikely
(but not impossible) that the conclusion is false, then we may say that the argument is inductively
strong. The following is an example of an inductively strong argument: 97% of the Republicans in town
Z voted for McX, Jones is a Republican in town Z; therefore, Jones voted for McX.
In an argument like this, an arguer often will conclude "Jones probably voted for McX" instead of "Jones
voted for McX," because they are signaling with the word "probably" that they intend to present an
argument that is inductively strong but not valid.

In order to evaluate an argument it is important to determine whether or not it is deductive or inductive.

It is inappropriate to criticize an inductively strong argument for being invalid. Based on the above
characterizations, whether an argument is deductive or inductive turns on whether the arguer intends
the argument to be valid or merely inductively strong, respectively. Sometimes the presence of certain
expressions such as ‘definitely’ and ‘probably’ in the above two arguments indicate the relevant
intensions of the arguer. Charity dictates that an invalid argument which is inductively strong be
evaluated as an inductive argument unless there is clear evidence to the contrary.

Conductive arguments have been put forward as a third category of arguments (for example, Govier
2010). A conductive argument is an argument whose premises are convergent; the premises count
separately in support of the conclusion. If one or more premises were removed from the argument, the
degree of support offered by the remaining premises would stay the same. The previously given example
of an argument with convergent premises is a conductive argument. The following is another example
of a conductive argument. It most likely won’t rain tomorrow. The sky is red tonight. Also, the weather
channel reported a 30% chance of rain for tomorrow.

The primary rationale for distinguishing conductive arguments from deductive and inductive ones is as
follows. First, the premises of conductive arguments are always convergent, but the premises of
deductive and inductive arguments are never convergent. Second, the evaluation of arguments with
convergent premises requires not only that each premise be evaluated individually as support for the
conclusion, but also the degree to which the premises support the conclusion collectivelymust be
determined. This second consideration mitigates against treating conductive arguments merely as a
collection of subarguments, each of which is deductive or inductive. The basic idea is that the support
that the convergent premises taken together provide the conclusion must be considered in the
evaluation of a conductive argument. With respect to the above conductive argument, the sky is red
tonight and the weather channel reported a 30% chance of rain for tomorrow are offered together as
(convergent) reasons for It most likely won’t rain tomorrow. Perhaps, collectively, but not individually,
these reasons would persuade an addressee that it most likely won’t rain tomorrow.
Arguments are everywhere
You may be surprised to hear that the word “argument” does not have to be written anywhere in your assignment for
it to be an important part of your task. In fact, making an argument—expressing a point of view on a subject and
supporting it with evidence—is often the aim of academic writing. Your instructors may assume that you know this
and thus may not explain the importance of arguments in class.

Most material you learn in college is or has been debated by someone, somewhere, at some time. Even when the
material you read or hear is presented as a simple fact, it may actually be one person’s interpretation of a set of
information. Instructors may call on you to examine that interpretation and defend it, refute it, or offer some new view
of your own. In writing assignments, you will almost always need to do more than just summarize information that
you have gathered or regurgitate facts that have been discussed in class. You will need to develop a point of view
on or interpretation of that material and provide evidence for your position.

Consider an example. For nearly 2000 years, educated people in many Western cultures believed that
bloodletting—deliberately causing a sick person to lose blood—was the most effective treatment for a variety of
illnesses. The claim that bloodletting is beneficial to human health was not widely questioned until the 1800s, and
some physicians continued to recommend bloodletting as late as the 1920s. Medical practices have now changed
because some people began to doubt the effectiveness of bloodletting; these people argued against it and provided
convincing evidence. Human knowledge grows out of such differences of opinion, and scholars like your instructors
spend their lives engaged in debate over what claims may be counted as accurate in their fields. In their courses,
they want you to engage in similar kinds of critical thinking and debate.

Argumentation is not just what your instructors do. We all use argumentation on a daily basis, and you probably
already have some skill at crafting an argument. The more you improve your skills in this area, the better you will be
at thinking critically, reasoning, making choices, and weighing evidence.

Evidence
Do not stop with having a point. You have to back up your point with evidence. The strength of your evidence, and
your use of it, can make or break your argument. See our handout on evidence. You already have the natural
inclination for this type of thinking, if not in an academic setting. Think about how you talked your parents into letting
you borrow the family car. Did you present them with lots of instances of your past trustworthiness? Did you make
them feel guilty because your friends’ parents all let them drive? Did you whine until they just wanted you to shut
up? Did you look up statistics on teen driving and use them to show how you didn’t fit the dangerous-driver profile?
These are all types of argumentation, and they exist in academia in similar forms.

Every field has slightly different requirements for acceptable evidence, so familiarize yourself with some arguments
from within that field instead of just applying whatever evidence you like best. Pay attention to your textbooks and
your instructor’s lectures. What types of argument and evidence are they using? The type of evidence that sways an
English instructor may not work to convince a sociology instructor. Find out what counts as proof that something is
true in that field. Is it statistics, a logical development of points, something from the object being discussed (art work,
text, culture, or atom), the way something works, or some combination of more than one of these things?

Be consistent with your evidence. Unlike negotiating for the use of your parents’ car, a college paper is not the place
for an all-out blitz of every type of argument. You can often use more than one type of evidence within a paper, but
make sure that within each section you are providing the reader with evidence appropriate to each claim. So, if you
start a paragraph or section with a statement like “Putting the student seating area closer to the basketball court will
raise player performance,” do not follow with your evidence on how much more money the university could raise by
letting more students go to games for free. Information about how fan support raises player morale, which then
results in better play, would be a better follow-up. Your next section could offer clear reasons why undergraduates
have as much or more right to attend an undergraduate event as wealthy alumni—but this information would not go
in the same section as the fan support stuff. You cannot convince a confused person, so keep things tidy and
ordered.
Counterargument
One way to strengthen your argument and show that you have a deep understanding of the issue you are
discussing is to anticipate and address counterarguments or objections. By considering what someone who
disagrees with your position might have to say about your argument, you show that you have thought things
through, and you dispose of some of the reasons your audience might have for not accepting your argument. Recall
our discussion of student seating in the Dean Dome. To make the most effective argument possible, you should
consider not only what students would say about seating but also what alumni who have paid a lot to get good seats
might say.

You can generate counterarguments by asking yourself how someone who disagrees with you might respond to
each of the points you’ve made or your position as a whole. If you can’t immediately imagine another position,
here are some strategies to try:

 Do some research. It may seem to you that no one could possibly disagree with the position you are
arguing, but someone probably has. For example, some people argue that the American Civil War never
ended. If you are making an argument concerning, for example, the outcomes of the Civil War, you might
wish to see what some of these people have to say.
 Talk with a friend or with your teacher. Another person may be able to imagine counterarguments that
haven’t occurred to you.
 Consider your conclusion or claim and the premises of your argument and imagine someone who denies
each of them. For example, if you argued, “Cats make the best pets. This is because they are clean and
independent,” you might imagine someone saying, “Cats do not make the best pets. They are dirty and
needy.”

Once you have thought up some counterarguments, consider how you will respond to them—will you concede that
your opponent has a point but explain why your audience should nonetheless accept your argument? Will you reject
the counterargument and explain why it is mistaken? Either way, you will want to leave your reader with a sense that
your argument is stronger than opposing arguments.

When you are summarizing opposing arguments, be charitable. Present each argument fairly and objectively, rather
than trying to make it look foolish. You want to show that you have considered the many sides of the issue. If you
simply attack or caricature your opponent (also referred to as presenting a “straw man”), you suggest that your
argument is only capable of defeating an extremely weak adversary, which may undermine your argument rather
than enhance it.

It is usually better to consider one or two serious counterarguments in some depth, rather than to give a long but
superficial list of many different counterarguments and replies.

Be sure that your reply is consistent with your original argument. If considering a counterargument changes your
position, you will need to go back and revise your original argument accordingly.

Critical reading
Critical reading is a big part of understanding argument. Although some of the material you read will be very
persuasive, do not fall under the spell of the printed word as authority. Very few of your instructors think of the texts
they assign as the last word on the subject. Remember that the author of every text has an agenda, something that
he or she wants you to believe. This is OK—everything is written from someone’s perspective—but it’s a good thing
to be aware of. For more information on objectivity and bias and on reading sources carefully, read our handouts
on evaluating print sources and reading to write.

Take notes either in the margins of your source (if you are using a photocopy or your own book) or on a separate
sheet as you read. Put away that highlighter! Simply highlighting a text is good for memorizing the main ideas in that
text—it does not encourage critical reading. Part of your goal as a reader should be to put the author’s ideas in your
own words. Then you can stop thinking of these ideas as facts and start thinking of them as arguments.
When you read, ask yourself questions like “What is the author trying to prove?” and “What is the author assuming I
will agree with?” Do you agree with the author? Does the author adequately defend her argument? What kind of
proof does she use? Is there something she leaves out that you would put in? Does putting it in hurt her argument?
As you get used to reading critically, you will start to see the sometimes-hidden agendas of other writers, and you
can use this skill to improve your own ability to craft effective arguments.
Argument vs Debate

What is the difference between argument and debate? Both ‘argument’ and
‘debate’ are related terms that can be used by English speakers to describe
speaking about a topic and providing support to their opinions on it. For
example, “She presented an argument about her opinion on the topic, and
that lead to a debate among her coworkers.”
The noun ‘argument’ means in technical terms statements, reasoning or
evidence presented by someone in written or spoken form that support
something, such as a particular opinion. For example, “He provided a valid
argument for having a four day work week.” It can also have the meaning of
a discussion in which people express their differing opinions with one
another on a topic. For example, “The company allowed the argument of the
issue of a four day work week to be discussed openly by all at the meeting.”
Arguments in this sense are generally persuasive in their nature about a
subject, but don’t often end in a decision or a formal ruling. ‘Argument’ also
has a less formal and more commonly used meaning of an angry or
passionate disagreement about something. For example, “Bob got into a
heated argument with his boss about whether or not he should have Fridays
off each week.”

A ‘debate’, as a noun, is understood as a formal discussion between people

or groups of people that is regulated. Interestingly, debates are considered
based on ‘arguments’, which are lines of reasoning, support or evidence
about a subject. However, a debate has the feeling of a larger, longer or more
formal discussion. A formal debate may even be judged by a person or a
panel of people, with one side winning the debate by providing the best lines
of reasoning or support for the issue. For example, “She argued that people
should have the right to decide about their own medical care at the debate.”
A debate has also come to have a meaning similar to an argument in the
negative sense in colloquial English in modern usage. For example you may
hear someone say, “The child had an all-out debate with his mother about
not eating his peas.” In this less formal usage, the word ‘debate’ is used to
show the discussion or disagreement was more involved or longer than a
normal argument, or perhaps less emotional or passionately angry. ‘Debate’
carries the idea of more intellectual discussion about disagreement when
used this way, as opposed to ‘argument’, which implies a more emotion
driven quarrel.

In general, ‘Argument’ means a line of reasoning or evidence in support of

an issue or opinion. It has a more informal usage, as well as it can imply a
personal dispute that has a more negative meaning to it. ‘Debate’ is more
often used as a formal word that implies a larger or public-style discussion
with people supporting both sides of the issue and rules or specific
guidelines governing the proceedings.

Read more: Difference between Argument and Debate | Difference

Between http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-
argument-and-debate/#ixzz5lFYUrLrm
What Makes a Successful Argument?
The above represent positions people hold, but which others may disagree with. Merely
making the above statements do not constitute an argument, no matter how often one repeats
the assertions. To create an argument, the person making the claims must offer further
statements which, at least in theory, support the claims. If the claim is supported, the
argument is successful; if the claim is not supported, the argument fails.

This is the purpose of an argument: to offer reasons and evidence for the purpose of
establishing the truth value of a proposition, which can mean either establishing that the
proposition is true or establishing that the proposition is false. If a series of statements does
not do this, it isn’t an argument.

Three Parts of an Argument

Another aspect of understanding arguments is to examine the parts. An argument can be
broken down into three major components: premises, inferences, and a conclusion.

Premises are statements of (assumed) fact which are supposed to set forth the reasons and/or
evidence for believing a claim. The claim, in turn, is the conclusion: what you finish with at
the end of an argument. When an argument is simple, you may just have a couple of premises
and a conclusion:

1. Doctors earn a lot of money. (premise)

2. I want to earn a lot of money. (premise)
3. I should become a doctor. (conclusion)

Inferences are the reasoning parts of an argument. Conclusions are a type of inference, but
always the final inference. Usually, an argument will be complicated enough to require
inferences linking the premises with the final conclusion:

1. Doctors earn a lot of money. (premise)

2. With a lot of money, a person can travel a lot. (premise)
3. Doctors can travel a lot. (inference, from 1 and 2)
4. I want to travel a lot. (premise)
5. I should become a doctor. (from 3 and 4)

Here we see two different types of claims which can occur in an argument. The first is
a factual claim, and this purports to offer evidence. The first two premises above are factual
claims and usually, not much time is spent on them — either they are true or they are not.

The second type is an inferential claim — it expresses the idea that some matter of fact is
related to the sought-after conclusion. This is the attempt to link the factual claim to the
conclusion in such a way as to support the conclusion. The third statement above is an
inferential claim because it infers from the previous two statements that doctors can travel a
lot.

Without an inferential claim, there would be no clear connection between the premises and
the conclusion. It is rare to have an argument where inferential claims play no role.
Sometimes you will come across an argument where inferential claims are needed,
but missing — you won’t be able to see the connection from factual claims to a conclusion
and will have to ask for them.

Assuming such inferential claims really are there, you will be spending most of your time on
them when evaluating and critiquing an argument. If the factual claims are true, it is with the
inferences that an argument will stand or fall, and it is here where you will find fallacies
committed.
Unfortunately, most arguments aren’t presented in such a logical and clear manner as the
above examples, making them difficult to decipher sometimes. But every argument which
really is an argument should be capable of being reformulated in such a manner. If you
cannot do that, then it is reasonable to suspect that something is wrong.