Phil 004

Week 3

Chapter 3 – Clarity of an

Argument

A Few Good Men (HW)

Issue: Is COL Jessup lying?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7EksvnO9hI

A Few Good Men (HW)

Summary of the Main Argument

(In general…)

5. Premise: Based on an order COL Jessup gave to LT Kendrick, COL Jessup

had no reason to believe PVT Santiago was in any danger.

9. Premise: Based on a transfer order COL Jessup gave (after the order to

Kendrick), it appears COL Jessup did believed PVT Santiago was in

danger.

11. Unstated Premise: COL Jessup cannot both believe PVT Santiago was in

danger and not in danger.

12. Conclusion: COL Jessup is lying about one of the orders.

A Few Good Men (HW)

Argument #1

1. Premise: COL Jessup ordered LT Kendrick to order the men in

Santiago’s platoon not to touch PVT Santiago.

2. Premise: LT Kendrick was clear about COL Jessup’s order.

3. Premise: No chance LT Kendrick ignored or forgot the order.

4. Premise: No chance platoon ignored LT Kendrick when relaying the

order to not touch PVT Santiago.

What conclusion does the defense want us to make here?

5. Conclusion: Therefore, COL Jessup no longer had reason to believe

Santiago was in danger.

Unstated premises?

6. Unstated premise: No chance the platoon misunderstood the order

relayed by LT Kendrick.

7. Unstated premise: By having the platoon follow COL Jessup’s order,

Santiago would no longer be in danger.

Two Types of

Arguments

A Few Good Men (HW)

Argument #2

8. Premise: COL Jessup gave an order to transfer PVT Santiago off the

base to remove PVT Santiago from the “grave” danger that comes from

a Code Red.

9. Conclusion: Jessup believed PVT Santiago was in “grave” danger.

A Few Good Men (HW)

Summary of the Main Argument

(In general…)

5. Premise: Based on an order COL Jessup gave to LT Kendrick, COL Jessup

had no reason to believe PVT Santiago was in any danger.

9. Premise: Based on a transfer order COL Jessup gave (after the order to

Kendrick), it appears COL Jessup did believed PVT Santiago was in

danger.

11. Unstated Premise: COL Jessup cannot both believe PVT Santiago was in

danger and not in danger.

12. Conclusion: COL Jessup is lying about one of the orders.

Clear Thinking/Writing, and

Critical Thinking (Ch3)

• Argument may not really be an argument if it’s not clear; confusing.

• Prime culprits:• Missing information, definitions,

context, etc.

• Vagueness

• Ambiguity

• Sometimes done intentionally. Why?

Clear Thinking/Writing, and

Critical Thinking (Ch3)

• Alan Greenspan (while Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board):

“It is a tricky problem to find the particular calibration in timing that would be appropriate to stem the acceleration in risk premiums created by falling incomes without prematurely aborting the decline in the inflation-generated risk premiums.”

Clear Thinking/Writing, and

Critical Thinking (Ch3)

• Alan Greenspan (while Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board):

On the weather: “I would generally expect that today in Washington, D.C., the probability of changes in the weather is highly uncertain. But we are monitoring the data in such a manner that we will be able to update people on changes that are important.”

Vagueness

• A statement is too vague when it

lacks enough detail for our

purposes.

• Let’s see what “vagueness” is…

10

Clear Thinking/Writing, and

Critical Thinking (Ch3)

11

Clear Thinking/Writing, and

Critical Thinking (Ch3)

Why would somebody claim this sign is too vague?

12

Clear Thinking/Writing, and

Critical Thinking (Ch3)

Why would somebody claim this sign is too vague?

13

Clear Thinking/Writing, and

Critical Thinking (Ch3)

Why would somebody claim this chart is too vague?

14

Clear Thinking/Writing, and

Critical Thinking (Ch3)

Why would somebody claim this chart is too vague?

15

Clear Thinking/Writing, and

Critical Thinking (Ch3)

Ever see anything like this?

16

Clear Thinking/Writing, and

Critical Thinking (Ch3)

Why would somebody claim this chart is too vague?

Which is more vague?

• Oswald was dealt a full house. • Oswald is not playing with a

full deck.

17

Is the italicized term too vague given the implied context?

“I’d just like a regular haircut, please.”

18

Is the italicized term too vague given the implied context?

“If you get ready for bed quickly,

Mommy has a surprise for you.”

• Just enough details to make a kid

intrigued.

19

Too vague given the implied context?

“Let’s have a little less noise, for

God’s sake! I’m trying to sleep!!”

20

Too vague given the implied context?

• “To avoid death from food poisoning, when cooking this dish, let the ingredients sit in the oven for a few minutes, but be sure not to set the temperature too low.”

21

Too vague, in your opinion?

• “Nothing short of total victory is acceptable in Iraq.”

22

What does this mean?

• Come up with a vague response and a more precise response to one of the following questions.– How is your favorite sports team

doing?– What did you do this weekend?– Why did you like (movie name)?

24

Group Activity

• Exercise 3-1 #1-5– Just pick the most vague and

the most precise options.

26

� 1

� D

� A

� 2.

� C

� D

� 3

� C

� D

� 4

� C

� B

� 5.

� A

� D