Business Ethics Summer 2022 Week 1 Lecture 2 Chaeyoung Paeki

Business Ethicssummer 2022 1week 1 Lecture 2chaeyoung Paekin Toda

In today’s class, we discussed arguments: what they are, how to evaluate their validity and soundness, and how to reconstruct informal arguments. An argument is a series of statements consisting of premises and a conclusion. Not all sentences are statements, as some can be questions or commands. We examined examples to identify whether they qualify as arguments. Good arguments are evaluated based on validity and soundness. Validity pertains to whether the conclusion logically follows from the premises, regardless of the truth of the premises. Soundness requires that the argument is valid and that all premises are true. Various exercises involved assessing the validity and soundness of different arguments, often involving considering whether conclusions logically follow from true premises. We also learned how to reconstruct informal arguments into formal premise-conclusion structures, paying attention to hidden premises that might be implied but unstated. During exercises, students practiced identifying hidden premises and determining the validity and soundness of both reconstructed and informal arguments, which sharpened their critical reasoning skills. This foundational understanding prepares us for applying logical analysis to moral and philosophical arguments in subsequent classes.

Paper For Above instruction

Arguments are fundamental components of reasoning and form the backbone of critical thinking, especially within philosophical and ethical discourse. An argument typically comprises a series of statements, known as premises, intended to support a conclusion. Recognizing and evaluating these arguments is essential in assessing the strength and validity of reasoning, particularly in complex fields like ethics where moral judgments often rely on logical structure and coherence.

Understanding what constitutes an argument involves distinguishing between statements and non-statements. Statements are sentences that can be either true or false—that is, they assert a fact or claim. For instance, "All trees are plants" is a statement; however, "Look at those trees!" is not, as it is an exclamation without a truth value. Analyzing examples reveals that arguments can take various forms, whether explicit or implicit, provided they have at least one premise and a conclusion. For example, the sequence "All dogs are mammals. Charlie is a dog. Therefore, Charlie is a mammal" constitutes a valid argument because the conclusion logically follows from the premises.

However, arguments vary greatly in quality. A 'good' argument is not solely judged by the truth of its premises or conclusion; instead, it depends on the logical relationship between them. Specifically, an argument is considered valid if, assuming the premises are true, the conclusion necessarily follows. Validity is a property inherent to the structure of the argument, not its content. On the other hand, soundness requires both validity and the actual truth of all premises. For example, an argument stating "All human beings die. Socrates is a human being. Therefore, Socrates will die" is both valid and sound because the premises are true, and the conclusion logically follows.

The assessment of arguments often involves examining these properties. Validity can be tested by considering whether it is impossible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false. For example, the argument "UMass Amherst is in Massachusetts. Massachusetts is in France. Therefore, UMass Amherst is in France" is valid because the conclusion necessarily follows if the premises are true, even though the premises are factually false.

Soundness enhances the evaluation by considering the truthfulness of premises. An argument that is valid but has false premises is not sound. For instance, "All dogs go to heaven. Charlie is a dog. Therefore, Charlie will go to heaven" is invalid if the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises, and even if it did, it would not be sound unless all premises are actually true. Practicing these evaluations deepens critical reasoning and helps distinguish between plausible and flawed arguments in philosophical discourse.

Additionally, reconstructing informal arguments into formal structures facilitates clearer analysis. Informal arguments, often presented in everyday language, may contain hidden premises or implied reasoning. Identifying and explicitly stating these hidden premises allows for a more rigorous evaluation of their logical validity and strength. This process involves careful reading and interpretation, ensuring that the reconstructed argument accurately represents the original reasoning while making all implicit steps explicit. It is a vital skill in philosophical inquiry, where precise logical analysis often reveals weaknesses or strengths not immediately apparent in casual presentation.

In summary, mastering the ability to identify, reconstruct, and evaluate arguments through the lenses of validity and soundness is essential for rigorous philosophical and ethical analysis. This process transforms everyday reasoning into formal, scrutinizable structures, enabling clearer, more objective assessments of their strength and credibility. Developing these skills will serve as a foundation for engaging with complex philosophical texts and constructing well-reasoned arguments in academic and real-world contexts.

References

• James Rachels. (2007). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Toulmin, S. (2003). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press.
• Copi, I. M., Cohen, C., & Morrow, R. (2016). Introduction to Logic. Routledge.
• Siegel, H. (2010). The Study of Arguments. Yale University Press.
• Walton, D. (2008). Informal Logic: A Pragmatic Approach. Cambridge University Press.
• Hansson, S. O. (2008). Reasoning about Uncertainty. Routledge.
• Nardone, M. (2014). How to Read an Argument. The Harvard Review of Philosophy, 20, 23-44.
• Restall, G. (2000). An Introduction to Formal Logic. Cambridge University Press.
• Hurley, P. J. (2014). A Concise Introduction to Logic. Cengage Learning.
• Kaufman, A. (2019). Critical Thinking and Logical Argumentation. Wiley.