A multi-reason argument...
- has at least one reason and at least one objection bearing directly upon the same contention
- has at least two reasons bearing directly upon the same contention
- has at least two reasons or objections bearing directly upon the same contention
- has at least two contention
Which of these is FALSE?
- Every counter-argument is a multi-reason argument.
- Every dispute is a multi-reason argument.
- Every dispute involves counter-arguments.
- Every counter-argument is part of a dispute.
A dispute is...
- a disagreement between people
- any complex argument involving both reasons and objections
- an argument in which there are both reasons and objections bearing upon a single contention
- an objection to an argument.
"Strange bedfellows" are
- two reasons pointing at the same contention when they should be pointing at different contentions
- two premises diagrammed as belonging to one reason when in fact they belong to different reasons
- two premises in one reason which don't hold hands with each other
- reasons which point to different contentions
To strand co-premises, you should:
- stick them in different reasons
- stick one in a reason and one in an objection
- stick them in the same reason even though they don't belong together
- leave them unconnected to anything
This argument map schema depicts...
- a multi-reason argument
- a dispute
- counterarguments
- a multi-reason argument, a dispute, and counter-arguments
- a dispute and counter-arguments, but not a multi-reason argument
This argument map schema
depicts...- a multi-reason argument
- a dispute
- counter-arguments
- strange bedfellows
- stranded co-premises
What is wrong with this argument map?
- Stranded co-premises
- Strange bedfellows
- Nothing
- Yoda doesn't love bacon
- It is not a dispute
What is wrong with this argument map?
- Stranded co-premises
- Strange bedfellows
- Iraq DOES have weapons of mass destruction.
- It is missing a co-premise.
- Nothing