Kim: She must like all rodents.
Minji: Why is that?
Kim: Because she likes hamsters.
Minji shouldn't dismiss the reasoning just because the link from premises to conclusion is missing. She should ask what's needed to make it strong by the Principle of Rational Discussion. We can't make this valid by saying that "she likes all rodents" because hamsters are just one species of several types of rodents. An obvious premise that can also be added is "All rodents are hamsters." We all know that this is false (guinea pigs, mice, rats) and can assume that Kim does, to, since he knows about the subject.
In that case, we have to try to make the argument valid. From there, we can see whether that claim is plausible to the other person.
It's possible that the premise is true, but the conclusion is false. Though there is no connection between the two in this example, we know that our conclusion (She must like all rodents) can be false, invalid, and weak.
No comments:
Post a Comment