What is a "STRONG" argument?

http://www.criticalthinkeracademy.com

A sample video from the video tutorial course titled "Basic Concepts in Logic and Argumentation". You can preview and purchase the full course at the web link above.

Table of Contents

Part 1: What is an Argument?
1.1 Definition of an argument
1.2 Definition of a claim, or statement
1.3 Definition of a good argument (I)
1.4 Identifying premises and conclusions

Part 2: What is a Good Argument?
2.1 The truth condition
2.2 The logic condition
2.3 Valid vs invalid arguments
2.4 Strong vs weak arguments
2.5 Definition of a good argument (II)

Part 3: Deductive versus Inductive Arguments
3.1 Deduction and valid reasoning
3.2 Induction and invalid reasoning
3.3 Induction and scientific reasoning

Category:

Education

Tags:

• argument
• critical thinking
• logic
• strong argument

[Heissenburger]

Fuzzy logic provides another calculus to handle different degrees of certainty. en(dot)wikipedia(dot)org(slash­)wiki(slash)Fuzzy_logic

[PhilosophyFreak]

@Heissenburger Very true! But in very different ways. The traditional notion of "logical strength" trades on the notion that belief or logical support can come in degrees, but retains bivalence (a proposition can only take on one of two truth values, "true" and "false"). Fuzzy logics trade on the notion that membership in a set can come in degrees, and correspondingly that truth values can come in degrees as well.

[socrates856]

I think this is misleading. Most A are B, x is in A, therefor x is B is invalid, but not because of probability. It is invalid because the valid phrase would be Most A are B, x is in A, therefore X is likely B.

There is a difference between strong valid and strong invalid arguments. Strength describes the probabilistic dimension (certain being best) and valid described the soundness of the deduction.

[PhilosophyFreak]

@socrates856 If we modify the conclusion as you suggest, then it's no longer an invalid argument (it's no longer a "risky" inference). The concept of a strong argument is meant to capture a risky inference (the conclusion doesn't follow with necessity) but that nevertheless it would be reasonable to accept. But the question of where to assign the probability (to the conclusion or to the inference as a whole) is an interesting one.

[PhilosophyFreak]

@socrates856 Strictly speaking, you can't have an argument that is both valid and strong, since strong arguments are by definition invalid. The terms 'valid' and 'invalid', and 'strong' and 'weak', are all used to describe the logical properties of an inference, they imply nothing about the actual truth or falsity of the premises themselves. In standard terminology, a valid argument with all true premise is called 'sound'; a strong argument with all true premises is called 'cogent'.

[PhilosophyFreak]

@socrates856 I really appreciate you taking the time to comment! Thanks!

[thesparitan]

carl sagan would be happy with these videos

[PhilosophyFreak]

@thesparitan i consider that a great compliment indeed, thank you!

[Traveler246]

FUCK! YOU'RE TOO FUCKING INTELLIGENT, YOU FUCKING SMART FUCK!

[steverock85]

Threshold made me think a little. The threshold is not fixed with logic but rather our conventional choice that we make.

It sounds to me that it means that 20% can be enough for strong argument when we are talking something that matters to life.

Shit...Now I started to think about... I should quit smoking... :/

[mourajini]

A true PhilosophyFreak, ;D thanks for the help! recpect!

[pinappleman1]

thanks, this helped me get an 83% on my civics essay / slideshow

[AngryRantingNerd]

Your videos are great for people studying for debate!

[vidbid1]

You could say that argument B is statistically strong and therefore the conclusion has a relatively high probability of being true.

[barifkin31]

Completely arbitrary!! Brings nobody closer to knowing, proving, or learning anything. Personal invocations of 'strong' and 'weak' do nothing to ameliorate the problem and arguing that such things 'strong' and 'weak' even exist is even a bigger hurdle to jump than the problems which their invocations attempt to solve. Get out of here.