Asking the Right Questions: Ch. 5-6

Clues for Locating Descriptive Assumptions

**Reconstruct the reasoning by filling in the missing links**: 1, Keep thinking about the *gap between the conclusion and reasons*. What would the writer have have had to take for granted to link the reasons with the conclusion? ("If the reason is true, what else must be true for the conclusion to follow?") 2. Look for *unstated ideas* that support reasons. Sometimes a reason is presented with no explicit support; yet the plausibility of the reason depends on the acceptability of ideas that have been taken for granted. 3. *Identify with the writer* or speaker. Locating someone's assumptions is often made easier by imagining that you were asked to defend the conclusion. 4. *Identify with the opposition*. If you are unable to locate assumptions by taking the role of the speaker or writer, try to reverse roles. Ask yourself why anyone might disagree with the conclusion. 5. *Avoid stating incompletely established reasons as assumptions*. An reason has not been sufficiently established by evidence is not an assumption.

Checking for Ambiguity

1. "*What do you mean* by that?" - Don't assume you and the author mean the same thing. 2. "Could any of the words or phrases *have a different meaning*?" - Don't assume terms have a single, obvious definition. 3. *Substitute the alternative meanings* into the reasoning structure and see whether changing the meaning makes a difference in how well a reason supports the conclusion.

Clues for Identifying Value Assumptions

1. Investigate the *author's background*. 2. Ask "Why do the *consequences* of the author's position seem so important to him or her?" 3. Search for *similar social controversies* to find analogous value assumptions. 4. Use *reverse role-playing*. Take a position opposite the author's position and identify which values are important to that opposite position. 5. Look for *common value conflicts*, such as individual responsibility versus community responsibility.

Clues for Locating Key Terms

1. Review the issue for *possible key terms* and how the author defines them. 2. Look for words or phrases in the reasons and conclusions that a) are *crucial to determining how well reasons support* the conclusion and b) affect whether you accept the conclusion. 2. Keep an eye out for *abstract words* and phrases (refers less and less to particular, specific instances) 3. Use *reverse role-playing* ( adopt a position contrary to the author's) to determine how someone might define certain words and phrases differently.

Context

1. The writer's or speaker's *background*, 2. *traditional uses* of the term within the particular controversy, and 3. *the words and statements preceding* and following the possible ambiguity. Provides clues to the meaning of a potential key term or phrase.

Assumptions

A belief, *usually unstated* and potentially deceptive, that is taken for granted and supports the explicit reasoning.

Trivial Assumption

A descriptive assumption that is *self-evident*. (assuming the reasons are true, assuming the reasons and conclusions are logically related, assuming background knowledge, etc)

Definitional Assumption

A type of descriptive assumption; *taking for granted of one meaning* for a term that has multiple possible meanings.

Value assumption

An unstatd belief about *how the world should be*. An *implicit preference for one value over another* in a particular context. (aka. prescriptive assumption, value judgement/priority/preference)

Descriptive Assumption

An unstated belief about *how the world was, is, or will become*.

Possible Meanings of Words

Synonyms and examples: Inadequate - Fail to tell you the specific properties crucial for an unambiguous understanding of the term. Definition by specific criteria: Useful - Specify criteria for usage—*the more specific, the better.*

Key Terms

Terms that *may have more than one plausible meaning* within the context of the issue, must be clarified before you can decide to agree or disagree.

Loaded Terms

Terms that trigger *strong emotional reactions*. Their ability to move us outweighs their descriptive meanings. Trouble for critical thinking because they short-circuit thought and trick the mind.

Value conflict

The *differing values* that stem from different frames of reference Common value conflicts: 1. Loyalty-honesty 2. Competition-cooperation 3. Freedom of press-national security 4. Order-freedom of speech 5. Rationality-spontaneity 6. Individual-community

Connotative Meaning

The *emotional associations* that we have to a term or phrase

Denotative Meaning

The agreed-upon explicit descriptive referents or use of the word; *dictionary definition*

Ambiguity

The existence of *multiple possible meanings* for a word or phrase. A term or phrase is ambiguous when its meaning is so uncertain in the context of the argument that we need further clarification before we can judge the adequacy of the reasoning.

Common Descriptive Assumptions

• *The events that happen to people are primarily the result of personal choices*. This assumption is the elephant behind the curtain shaping when and whom we blame and give credit to. • *The speaker or writer is a typical person*. When someone makes this assumption, she reasons explicitly based on her own experience or tastes. • *The world is just*. This assumption is in the background, holding up reasoning of the form: That something should be true means that it will be true. Often called the romantic fallacy. • *Because something happened in the past, it will happen in the future*. This assumption represents an uncritical and overly simplified reaction to the history of a person or even a country. • *My world is the center of the universe*. This assumption makes it difficult for us to support laws or policies that primarily benefit others; that is, it inhibits empathy for the vulnerable. This assumption also makes it difficult for us to appreciate cultural diversity. *Each of these assumptions is debatable*, meaning that reasonable people disagree about the accuracy of the assumption.