Jump to content

Argument (disambiguation): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
OK, then.
Larry_Sanger (talk)
OK, then.
Line 1: Line 1:
The word ''argument'' has a number of senses. Here are two:
The word ''argument'' has a number of senses. Here are two:




#([[Logic]]) An ''argument'' is a set of statements, one of which (the <i>conclusion</i>), it is said or implied, follows from the others (the <i>premises</i>).
#([[Logic]]) An ''argument'' is a set of statements, one of which (the <i>conclusion</i>), it is said or implied, follows from the others (the <i>premises</i>).

#([[Mathematics]] and [[computer science]]) An ''argument'' is a variable or value passed into a [[function]], [[subroutine]], or an [[application program]]. An argument passed to an application program is referred to as a [[command line argument]].
#([[Mathematics]] and [[computer science]]) An ''argument'' is a variable or value passed into a [[function]], [[subroutine]], or an [[application program]]. An argument passed to an application program is referred to as a [[command line argument]].




The rest of this article concerns "argument" in the first sense.
The rest of this article concerns "argument" in the first sense.



To give an argument is to give evidence, and then draw a conclusion from it; it is to give reasons to believe something, and then to state the belief. The statements that give expression to the evidence, or the reasons, are all called the <i>premises</i>; the thing one argues <i>for</i> is called the <i>conclusion</i>; and if the argument is successful, the premises together entail the conclusion. One can think of a whole argument as a set of statements, comprising premise or premises, the conclusion, and the fact (or supposed fact) that the premises entail the conclusion. But usually the latter logical relationship between the premises and the conclusion is not explicitly stated, and sometimes the conclusion itself is not stated either, but left to the reader to supply.

To give an argument is to give evidence, and then draw a conclusion from it; it is to give reasons to believe something, and then to state the belief. The statements that give expression to the evidence, or the reasons, are all called the <i>premises</i>; the thing one argues <i>for</i> is called the <i>conclusion</i>; and if the argument is successful, the premises together ''entail'' or ''imply'' the conclusion. One can think of a whole argument as a set of statements, comprising premise or premises, the conclusion, and the fact (or supposed fact) that the premises entail the conclusion. But usually the latter logical relationship between the premises and the conclusion is not explicitly stated, and sometimes the conclusion itself is not stated either, but left to the reader to supply.




There are <i>other</i> kinds of sets of statements besides arguments,
There are <i>other</i> kinds of sets of statements besides arguments,

such as [[explanation]]s. Logic does not, except in its applications,
such as [[explanation]]s. Logic does not, except in its applications,

concern itself with explanations. For example, suppose James offers an
concern itself with explanations. For example, suppose James offers an

explanation for why there are [[tide]]s: he talks about the
explanation for why there are [[tide]]s: he talks about the

gravitational effect of the [[moon]] and the [[sun]] on the [[ocean]]s,
gravitational effect of the [[moon]] and the [[sun]] on the [[ocean]]s,

and so on. <i>That</i> is not an argument; it is an <i>explanation</i>.
and so on. <i>That</i> is not an argument; it is an <i>explanation</i>.

In <i>that</i> case, James explains why there are tides. He is not
In <i>that</i> case, James explains why there are tides. He is not

trying to convince anyone <i>that</i> there are tides. It is already
trying to convince anyone <i>that</i> there are tides. It is already

agreed that there are tides. The question the explanation answers is
agreed that there are tides. The question the explanation answers is

<i>why</i> there are.
<i>why</i> there are.




On the other hand, suppose James argue for the following claim: "[[God]]
On the other hand, suppose James argue for the following claim: "[[God]]

exists." In that case James is <i>not</i> explaining why there is a
exists." In that case James is <i>not</i> explaining why there is a

God. If he tried to explain why there is a God, he would be
God. If he tried to explain why there is a God, he would be

<i>assuming</i> that there is a God. But if what he is doing is
<i>assuming</i> that there is a God. But if what he is doing is

<i>arguing</i> for the existence of God, then he is not <i>assuming</i>
<i>arguing</i> for the existence of God, then he is not <i>assuming</i>

that he exists; rather, he is trying to <i>convince</i> someone that God
that he exists; rather, he is trying to <i>convince</i> someone that God

exists.
exists.




The difference between an argument and an explanation should be clear.
The difference between an argument and an explanation should be clear.

On the one hand, the function or purpose of an argument is to convince
On the one hand, the function or purpose of an argument is to convince

people who might be doubting the conclusion. On the other hand, the
people who might be doubting the conclusion. On the other hand, the

function or purpose of an explanation is to give the cause of some
function or purpose of an explanation is to give the cause of some

phenomenon which we observe, or are willing to assume actually occurs.
phenomenon which we observe, or are willing to assume actually occurs.

To put it even more briefly, the purpose of an argument is to
To put it even more briefly, the purpose of an argument is to

<i>persuade</i>, while the purpose of an explanation is to
<i>persuade</i>, while the purpose of an explanation is to

<i>explain</i>.
<i>explain</i>.




There are [[good argument]]s and bad. No doubt there are a lot more bad
There are [[good argument]]s and bad. No doubt there are a lot more bad

arguments in the world than good ones. The ways in which arguments go
arguments in the world than good ones. The ways in which arguments go

wrong fall into certain patterns, called [[logical fallacy|logical fallacies]].
wrong fall into certain patterns, called [[logical fallacy|logical fallacies]].


Revision as of 17:53, 1 September 2001

The word argument has a number of senses. Here are two:


  1. (Logic) An argument is a set of statements, one of which (the conclusion), it is said or implied, follows from the others (the premises).
  1. (Mathematics and computer science) An argument is a variable or value passed into a function, subroutine, or an application program. An argument passed to an application program is referred to as a command line argument.


The rest of this article concerns "argument" in the first sense.


To give an argument is to give evidence, and then draw a conclusion from it; it is to give reasons to believe something, and then to state the belief. The statements that give expression to the evidence, or the reasons, are all called the premises; the thing one argues for is called the conclusion; and if the argument is successful, the premises together entail or imply the conclusion. One can think of a whole argument as a set of statements, comprising premise or premises, the conclusion, and the fact (or supposed fact) that the premises entail the conclusion. But usually the latter logical relationship between the premises and the conclusion is not explicitly stated, and sometimes the conclusion itself is not stated either, but left to the reader to supply.


There are other kinds of sets of statements besides arguments,

such as explanations. Logic does not, except in its applications,

concern itself with explanations. For example, suppose James offers an

explanation for why there are tides: he talks about the

gravitational effect of the moon and the sun on the oceans,

and so on. That is not an argument; it is an explanation.

In that case, James explains why there are tides. He is not

trying to convince anyone that there are tides. It is already

agreed that there are tides. The question the explanation answers is

why there are.


On the other hand, suppose James argue for the following claim: "God

exists." In that case James is not explaining why there is a

God. If he tried to explain why there is a God, he would be

assuming that there is a God. But if what he is doing is

arguing for the existence of God, then he is not assuming

that he exists; rather, he is trying to convince someone that God

exists.


The difference between an argument and an explanation should be clear.

On the one hand, the function or purpose of an argument is to convince

people who might be doubting the conclusion. On the other hand, the

function or purpose of an explanation is to give the cause of some

phenomenon which we observe, or are willing to assume actually occurs.

To put it even more briefly, the purpose of an argument is to

persuade, while the purpose of an explanation is to

explain.


There are good arguments and bad. No doubt there are a lot more bad

arguments in the world than good ones. The ways in which arguments go

wrong fall into certain patterns, called logical fallacies.