A concept from chapter 7 I found interesting is the concept of how to refute an argument. According to Epstein the direct ways of refuting an argument is to show at least one of the premises is dubious, the argument isn't valid or strong, or that the conclusion is false. Only one of these three has to be shown to directly refute an argument. For instance, “The only reason why Kobe Bryant Scores a lot of points is because he ball hogs, if he didn’t ball hog he wouldn’t score as many points”. You can refute this by saying “Kobe doesn’t score a lot of points because he ball hogs, he picks and chooses his shots wisely, he distributes to his teammates throughout the game, and he even leads his team in assist”. The Argument has been refuted because there is evidence proving that one of the premises in the argument is dubious.
I’m not really big on sports; however, I liked your example. When I read about refuting an argument, it seems hard to do when given instructions. But we do this on an everyday basis but in different ways. Out of all the three reasons of how to refute an argument, I found that proving one of the premises to be dubious would be the easiest. However, if this were difficult for someone, then proving that a conclusion is false would be an easy way to refute an argument. The way of refuting an argument by proving whether it is valid or strong is a little difficult. I still get a little confused between a valid or strong argument.
ReplyDelete