【分享】对BF题有用的一些解释

尾巴儿

这个是我逻辑学课的ppt节选（我竟然真的为了gmat选了这门挂人无数的课...），感觉挺有用的，分享给大家~
留意其中principle是属于argument中warrant部分的，和evidence有少许区别。

The Three Primary Elements of an Argument

1. Claim (assertion, proposition)
   1. A statement affirming or denying something
      
   2. the answer to the question "What are you trying to prove?" "What's your point?" - Can be denied (in this context)
      
      
   
   
2. Grounds (Support, evidence)
   1. material which will convince audience/opponent
      
   2. not likely to be disputed (in this context) OR can be further supported.
      
   3. usually more concrete, often narrower (or a general truth).
      
   4. an answer to the question, "How so?" "Why do you think so?" "rove it!"
      
   5. It is appropriate for the claim because it is relevant and strong.
      
      
   
   
3. Warrant: what links support/gr. to cl. Why the gr. is allowed to stand as proof for the claim
   1. A principle of logic or reasoning
      
   2. a recipe or license
      
   3. often a formal rule
      
   4. generally unstated, an assumption that both rhetor and audience implicitly accept
   5. the key is that a warrant can apply to many claims and grounds. It's not specific to just this situation.
      
      
      
   6. the key is that a warrant can apply to many claims and grounds. It's not specific to just this situation.
      
      
   
   

EXAMPLE:

Claim:  Joe Smith is a good choice for the position of Appellate Court Judge
Grounds:  The American Bar Association recommended Smith as well qualified.
Warrant:  (usually unspoken)  The ABA is an authority source known as competent to determine who is a good choice for appellate judge positions.

wumoyan

谢谢了  正为这类题型 犯愁呢

尾巴儿

我会继续贴一些对CR有用的课件内容上来~~攒RP啊~~

尾巴儿

以下这些也可以应用于argument，O(∩_∩)O哈！
Evidence (Grounds)

Evidence is

External to advocate / objective    AND

Has probative force (or value) = believability + relevance



1.    Factual evidence

A.   Reports (examples and descriptions)

Reports are most effective if specific and highly relevant to claim

Evaluation of reports (Challenge report evidence on ...)

1.                  recency

2.                  sufficiency

3.                  relevance

4.                  representativeness

5.                  consistency with audience exper.ience & other known facts

6.                  quality of source characteristics including: is the source:

in a position to observe?

capable of accuracy?

not prejudiced?

has a truthful reputation?



B.     Statistics (quantitative data groupings and summaries)

Statistics are most effective if how they are collected is explained

Evaluation of statistics (Challenge statistical evidence on ...)


1.                  are the statistics recent?

2.                  are terms clearly defined?

3.                  is sampling correct?

4.                  Are measures of reliability, validity, & error included.

5.                  is something omitted (e.g. control groups, ) (e.g. baseline Athe rate tripled@ [from 2 in a trillion to 6 ... ]



2.     Opinion - interpretation of facts, judgments -- expert and lay

Uses:

a.                  establish causal connections in the case (inherency and benefits)

b.                  future prediction (benefits)

c.                  propose workable solutions (solvency) (benefits)

Evaluation of opinion evidence (Challenge opinion evidence on ...)

1.                  is the source qualified?

2.                  biased?

3.                  respected by others in field?

4.                  is opinion internally consistent?

5.                  has the source used data - externally consistent with facts?





3.  Analogy -  things compared to make an inference from one to the other

evaluation of analogies:  (Challenge analogies on ...)

Are the things compared similar in all important ways?

尾巴儿

只要留意generalization就可以了，想当初我想当纠结什么事generalization....

GENERAL TYPES OF WARRANTS (REASONING)

Authority: "There is good reason (person, text) to believe that the source of the claim/grounds should be believed."

Example: AThe Joint Chiefs are experts in military affairs and they should know.@

Example/induction/generalization: "This particular ca(s) (in the grounds) is representative of a large group of similar cases or of a `principle'."

Example: AStatistically, 1600 people is a sufficiently large sample to reflect the opinion of the entire country is they are randomly selected.@

Deduction: "The general principle specified in the grounds applies to the specific instance in the claim."

Example:  W.  "All men are mortal."  (along with gr. "Socrates is a man." and cl.  "Therefore, Socrates is mortal." these three statements form the categorical syllogism.)

Sign: "Those conditions specified in the grounds are 'signs' (are associated regularly with) the claim."

Example: ALow unemployment is a sign that the economy is growing.@

Comparision/Analogy: " The two instances described in the argument are similar in all important ways, thus what is true for one must be true for the other."

Example: AKnox and Monmouth are similar in terms of campus safety.@

Cause: "The conditions specified in the grounds are sufficient to produce the effect claimed. [This can work negatively too.]

Example: ALack of oxygen to the brain for more than 6 minutes is enough to cause death.@

Definition/classification: "By definition we call what is specified in the grounds by the name given in the claim." "Gr. is a member of the class indicated in the claim." [This can work negatively too.]

Example: AActing courageously in the face of fear is the definition of heroism@

Value: "The circumstances represented in the grounds are reflective of good/bad or right/wrong as indicated in the conclusion."

Example: ACheating is wrong!@

Policy:  "The 'reasons' presented in the grounds are sufficient to prove that the action described in the claim should be taken."

Example: "If there are significant, inherent problems which can be solved by a workable plan with advantages outweighing disadvantages, it should be implemented."

Residues:  The grounds eliminate or prohibit all possibilities except one.

Example:  No technology exists to permit travel across the vast distances between stars.  Therefore, interstellar space travel cannot be done.

Dilemma:  Either - or choices.

Example:  If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem

Consistency expectation warrant:

Example: "eople's actions are (should be) consistent with attitudes, values, preferences, self-interest"

peter3008

我上逻辑课的时候,看那位老师的思维就怪怪,而且傻傻的,觉得逻辑害人啊~
GMAT一定要过的坎~那么多人学逻辑为了考试,有几个人能够碰上问题,真正的运用逻辑去思考呢,记得有篇阅读说的是直觉领导.正如lie to me里面的一句台词,"不要认为这个是你的天赋,但是再也不是你所拥有的,人们可以学习获得了" 是啊,所以我们需要一直学习,没有止境~都是拜高科技所赐~