The Nature of Arguments

The study of logic in relation to arguments can be intellectually rewarding for its own sake. The
study of logic enhances clarity of thoughts and systematization of principles needed for
philosophical reasoning.

An argument is a group of propositions, one of which, called the conclusion, is affirmed on the
basis of the others, which are called premises. An argument is always the smallest unit of
argumentation. At least two propositions or statements form an argument otherwise it is not
argument. But not all the statements are arguments. Some non argumentative uses of statements
such as in reports illustration, explanatory statements, conditional statement etc. are sometimes
confused with arguments as earlier stated, at least two statements or propositions form an
argument. In the case of two propositions only one must be the premise while the other must be
the conclusion.

For instance: “A soon as Dr Adetubo comes, we will pray”. Here the conclusion is “We will
pray” while the premise is “Dr Adetubo comes”. the expression ”as soon as “ stand as premise
indicator. When more than two propositions or statements form an argument, one must be a
conclusion while the others must be premises.

Terms connected with Arguments

The basic terms connected with the form of argument, its recognition, identification and
assessments are multifarious. These include among others: “inference” “reasoning”, and “proof”.
Ideally, we should understand that “inference” “reasoning”, “proof” and “argument” are not
exactly synonymous but are all technically and intrinsically connected. How can we define or
describe each of these terms in a logical sense.

Inference: an inference is a mental act of reaching a conclusion from one’s premises. It is a

process of inferring a conclusion from the list of stated premises. It can aalso be described as a
process by which one propositions is arrived at and affirmed on the basis of one or more other
propositions accepted as the starting point of the process.

Reasoning: this is a mental activity of marshalling one’s premises, reflecting upon their weight
and making inferences. While all reasoning is thinking, it is not the case that all thinking is
reasoning. The logician, however, is concerned primarily with the correctness of the completed
process of reasoning.

A Proof: this is an argument or evidence that succeeds in establishing the truth of its conclusion.
However, in weaker sense, a proof is a demonstration that certain conclusion would strictly
follow from certain premises even though there may be no reason to accept the premises and no
reason to accept the conclusion

An argument: An argument is any group of propositions of which one is claimed to follow from
the others which are regarded as providing support or ground for the truth of that one. An
argument is more or less a formulation, in words or symbols, of premises and of a conclusion
that is inferred from them. A good argument normally has a structure containing the premises
and the conclusion. Sometimes, the premises of an argument are stated first and the conclusion
second. In other cases, the conclusion of an argument is stated first and the premises second.
However, there is no special rule as to which of them should come first. An example of an
argument in which the premises are stated before the conclusion is the following:

If it rains, then the ground is wet------premise

It rains --------premise

Therefore, the ground is wet---------conclusion

On the other hand, an example of argument in which the conclusion is stated first before the
premises is the following;

The dust is prevented----------conclusion

This is because the ground is wet-----premise

Recognizing Arguments

In the identification of argument, the conclusion of the argument must be logically and clearly
differentiated from the premises. Though, there is no mechanical accuracy or logical techniques
for doing this, however, there are some useful guides which signal the presence of the conclusion
and of the premises of an argument. This is usually what are regarded as conclusion locator and
the premise locator. Though there is no exhaustive list of such locators, but there are some
conclusion locators which in most cases point to the fact that what follows is the conclusion of
the argument. These conclusion locators include among others the following:

Conclusion; conclusion is that proposition, within the argument, that is arrived at on the strength
or basis of the information provided by the premises, simply put, conclusion means to come or
brings to an end. In any valid argument, the conclusion follows from the premises.

Conclusion Locators

Therefore consequently conclusively

Hence so by and large

Must Should ought

In sum be which shows that

It follows that we can conclude that we may infer that

Which implies that which proves that I submit that

My position is that which points to the fact nevertheless…

It resolved that

Premise; premise is also one of the basic concepts in logic. It is known as evidence or claim.
Basically, a premises refers to that proposition or statement, within an argument, which provides
support for or grounds for asserting the conclusion of that argument. In a valid argument, the
premises imply the conclusion.

In the same vein, the under listed “premises locators” normally gives an impression that what
follows each of them is a premise of the argument though the list is not exhaustive

Since for the following reasons

One follows from

First in view of the fact that

In addition may be deduced from

Moreover may be inferred from

Besides as shown by

Assuming that in as much as

For because… et al

Given that where as

In order to identify an argument properly one should be able to recognize the variations in these
locators especially in a complex argument. Argument locators are generally pointers that easily
help in identifying or recognizing either the conclusion or the major premises of an argument

Forms of Argument

There are two forms of argument:

a. Simple Argument
b. Complex argument

A simple argument by definition is an argument containing one, two, or three ideas stated in a
simple version. Such an argument is always straight forward to understand. It normally contains
one, two or three statement as premises with another statement to conclude.

Example; Bongo is not in class, and he would not be absent unless he had a good excuse.
Therefore Bongo must has a good excuse

A complex argument by nature normally contains as many argument as possible. It could take
various patterns like debate, a write up, conference paper et al. the structural feature of such an
argument is that it normally has a theme, with so many premises and conclusion(s). there are
some structural features which appear to differentiate a complex argument from a simple
argument. These features include;

a. Very many major premises i.e stronger claims

 b. Mini premises supporting each or some of the major premises i.e additional supporting
claims for the stronger ones
c. Major conclusion. I.e the major themes or the position being defended
d. Auxiliary conclusion. Ie additional supporting claims or ancillary evidence for the
position being defended

Types of Argument

a. Deductive Argument
b. Inductive Arguments

Deductive Argument: A deductive argument is an inference in which the conclusion follows

necessarily from the premises. It is an argument if it is formally arranged in a series of lines so
that each line is a premise and is inferred from earlier lines by means of some principles of
inferences. In short, from universal law or principle, we deduce a particular. In a deductive
argument, the premises provide enough or absolutely conclusive ground for its conclusion. A
deductive inference will be valid when its premises and conclusion are so related that it is
absolutely impossible for the premises to be true unless the conclusion is true, otherwise invalid.
In another sense, a valid inference is an argument whose premises are truth functionally implied
by the conclusion and if not invalid.

It should be noted that the validity of an argument or of a deductive inference does not in any
way guarantee the truth of the argument to the fact. Hence it is illogical, and therefore incorrect
to speak of a true argument when you mean a valid argument, or of a valid conclusion when you
mean a true conclusion. Given this, if a syllogism or a deductive argument complies with the
formal rules, it is valid, if not, not. Once the conclusion of an argument or of a deductive
inference conclusively follows from the premises it is valid even though both premises and
conclusion may not be true to fact.

Example;

1. Pr 1: All fish are cold blooded

Pr 2: Whales are fish

 There4: Whale are cold blooded

By way of evaluation,this argument happen to be a good valid deductive inference even though
the first premise is true, the second premise is false and the conclusion is false.

For a deductive argument to be valid at least the following conditions must be fulfilled. In other
words, a deductive argument is valid if only if;

a. The premises imply the conclusion

b. The premises entail the conclusion
c. The conclusion follows from the premises
d. The premises necessitate the conclusion
e. The conclusion can be inferred from the premises.

Types of Deductive Argument

i. Those that go from General to Particular

ii. Those that go from General to General
iii. Those that formulated to some Rules of Inference(laws of logic) i.e according to :
i. Rule of modus Pones(M.P)

Example; if Nigeria is in Africa, then Nigeria is in the Third World9Material conditional

statement)

Nigeria is in Africa (Antecedent Affirmed)

Therefore, Nigeria is in the third world(Consequent Affirmed)

This law state that in any argument, if a material conditional statement(first premise) and its
antecedent(second premise) are true, then its consequent must be true and must follow.

ii. Rule of Modus Tollens (M.T)

Example: if Nigeria is in Africa, then Nigeria is in the Third World( A material conditional
statement)

Nigeria is not in the third World country(consequent Denied)

 Therefore, Nigeria is not in Africa( Antecedent Denied)

This rule holds that in an argument, if the material conditional statement (first premise) is true,
and its consequent is false, then its antecedent nust be fse

Inductive Argument

An inductive argument is a non-deductive inference in which the conclusion expresses an

empirical conjecture that goes beyond what the premises claim. In this type of argument, the
conclusion logically implies an item of information not necessarily implied by the premises, and
that which can be confirmed or refuted only on the basis of evidence drawn from sense
experience. An Inductive argument is a kind of argument that proceeds from the experienced
(particular) to the inexperienced (general), from the known to the unknown.

Example :

Pr 1: Mr Rogger Miller is a Cameroonian and a football player

Pr 2: Mr Eto Fil is a Cameroonian and a football player

Pr 3: Mr Rigobert Song is a Cameroonian and a football player

Therefore: All Cameroonian are football players

Pr 1: Idi Amin was a dictator and was ruthless

Pr2: Samuel Doe was a dictator and was ruthless

Pr3: Kabila is a dictator

Therefore, Kabila is ruthless

Differences between Inductive and Deductive Argument

i. In deductive argument, all the premise do not only support but also guarantee the
conclusion while in inductive, the premises only support, but do not guarantee the
conclusion.
ii. Deductive reasoning offers certainty but inductive reasoning can offer very high
degree of probability but not certainty
iii. Deductive argument is limited to two premises while in Inductive argument there is
no limit to the number of premises
iv. Deductive argument is classified as valid or invalid, sound or unsound but Inductive
argument is either good or bad, weak or strong, adequate or inadequate
v. In Deductive argument, conclusion contains less information than the premises, there
is no information in the conclusion which cannot be found in the premises, while in
the Inductive argument, conclusion contain more information than the premises. It
even goes into future.
vi. Deductive argument is not so useful to scientists but Inductive reasoning is of vital
importance to scientist. Sampling theory, commonly used in the science owes its
origin from this.
vii. Deductive argument is of three parts; those move from general to particular, those
that go from general to general and those formulated according to the rules of
inference