Chapter 7 focuses on Raising Objections and Refuting an Argument. After reading this chapter I learned how to refute an argument directly and indirectly.
There are three main ways to refute an argument directly. One has to prove that at least one of the arguments are uncertain. Also, it is important to prove that the premises aren’t valid or strong. Lastly, one has to show that the conclusion is false.
When refuting an argument indirectly, you can’t always prove that the premises are uncertain or false. The conclusion may be argued, but the argument seems inconsistent and illogical. When I was reading about how to refute an argument indirectly, I also learned about the term “reducing to the absurd”. When one reduces to the absurd, one proves that at least one of the claims is not true and doubtful. Therefore, one is proving that the argument has an unwanted conclusion.
Your understanding of chapter 7 was a great interpretation of the reading in the Epstein text. the topic of refuting the arguments was one that you described very well. You found a great way to interpret the reading and regurgitate it in a great way that makes it easy to understand what the topic was discussing. Thank you the great post.
ReplyDeleteGreat explanation of rising objections, refuting an argument, and refuting an argument directly or indirectly. I also quoted Epstein and listed the three main ways to refute an argument directly; I think this provides a strong core of understanding. I like how you explained the term “reducing to the absurd”. I did not include that in my post, and I thought it was interesting that you did. I think that including it made your argument and explanation of refuting an argument indirectly more clear and easier to understand. I like the way you just re-worded what the book said in your own words because its easier to understand the subject matter then way, when compared to understanding what the book is saying.
ReplyDeleteYou did a great job on this post. You explained everything very well from raising objections to refuting an argument. I like how you quoted Epstein because it showed that you could really relate the material. Also, I like that you explained each of the three main ways to refute an argument directly because it can be a bit hard to understand without a strong definition. The inclusion of your quote worked out well because it made your argument, explanation, and entire post much stronger. Moreover, the way you worded everything made it very simple to comprehend in my opinion. Good job.
ReplyDeleteGreat job Lyss! You explained how to refute an argument directly and indirectly very well. Also remember that when refuting an argument is bad, there may be phony and ridiculous premises as well. Also, to refute an argument means that the premises are doubtable and there is reason to believe that it is not a valid nor strong argument. How you stated that you cannot always prove the premises are uncertain or false was a good explanation that I did not consider in my blog post. I was a little confused about your last sentence about how proving that the argument has an unwanted conclusion. I’m not sure what this means. But other than that, good job!
ReplyDelete