Ministry of higher and secondary special education of the republic of uzbekistan course paper

Main Types of Argumentation

• 
  Deductive Argumentation
  

Deductive argumentation is the best kind of argumentation because it draws conclusions from premises that are verifiable and verifiable. The validity of the deductive arguments comes from the reasoning that is done about the premises: if valid premises are presented, the conclusion can only be valid. It is necessary to emphasize that the deductive argument presents a limitation: these arguments lack evidence beyond what is presented in the premises, reason why it requires the use of other resources to support the arguments.
The basic form of deductive arguments is as follows:
If A is B and B is C, then A is C. Let's take an example to illustrate this concept: If dolphins are mammals and mammals produce breast milk, then dolphins produce breast milk. The deductive argument can also be formulated as follows:
All that is A is B. C is B. Then C is A.
For example: All human beings are mortal. I am a human being. Then I am mortal. This is the prototype of deductive argument, and was proposed by Aristotle under the nomenclature of"syllogism".
As can be seen, two premises and one conclusion are presented:
Premise # 1: All that is A is B.
Premise # 2: C is B.
Conclusion: Then C is A.
Of these two premises, the first one is called"universal proposition"since it offers general information on the subject to treat. For example: Everybody Humans are Mortal . The second premise is called a specific statement, since it provides more detailed information on the subject to be addressed. For example: I I am a human being . These two premises logically lead to the conclusion. If all human beings are mortal and I am a human being, then Indeed I am mortal .

• 
  Inductive argumentation
  

In the previous section, we mention that the limitation of the deductive arguments is that they lack exhaustive evidence, reason why it is necessary to resort to other elements. This limitation is solved with inductive argumentation. Basically, the inductive argument consists of assuming the premises to generate arguments that serve to support the conclusion. In this way, it is probable and not insurance That the conclusions are true. In this case, the validity of the conclusion comes from the induction ability of the person making the premises. The inductive argumentation is weak since the results offered by it are Plausible , Acceptable but no Conclusive . In this sense, they oppose deductive argument. [9.290]
An example of inductive argumentation is as follows:
Conclusion: The grass is wet when it rains.
Premise: Every time it rains, the grass gets wet.
As can be seen, the inductive arguments infer the antecedents for an observable condition. In the example, the observable condition is that the grass is wet when it has rained. From this condition, premises are extracted that could be true.

•