LOGIC AND REASONING OF COUNTER ARGUMENTS WITHIN THE ARGUMENT

by Matt Stone QHCusa, 2012

We often learn that at times we may establish a base line of what  value is of anticipating and preempting counterarguments within the argument and may effect the reader or listener. For instance, Browne and Keeley (2010) says reasoning is the art of narrowing the gap within the data presented between what is truth to validate for our conclusions rather than on the side of unfounded  reasoning which is why counter arguing may narrow this gap away from the side of being inconclusive. To aid in this approach, critical thinkers must have the skill sets to decipher credible data before one signs off of the argument as truth or we may run the risk of buying into the dialog that may be a fallacy. For instance, the fallacies of the writer’s arguments may pose a risk to the validity of the argument and the perceptions by reader or listener which is why critical thinkers should position their counter argument questions in a strategic format such as, mile post questions to follow while validating the  facts along the way to the conclusions.

Browne and Kelley (2010) define this as a logical approach to validate the gaps among the missing data other than opinions which in turn, counters and produces a solid foundation for a counter argument between both parties. To support these ideas we must also take heed to the theory that definitions we may use to support the argument do not necessarily uphold the argument because, as with the mile post example, Weston (2012) cite that definitions may help us to organize our thoughts and often, only help us to decide upon the differences and or similarities among the data presented. Weston further cites that “people may discover that they do not really disagree about the issue at all which is why definitions seldom settle difficult questions that one may pose in an argument” especially when the reader or listener is  anticipating or preempting counterarguments within the argument.

Reference

Browne, M.N., Keeley, S.M. (2010). Asking the right questions. A critical guide to critical thinking. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. Pearson Education, Inc.

Weston, A. (2012). A Rule Book for Arguments. (4^th Ed). Indianapolis, Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Co.