 |
|
||||
Up to this point we've been mapping arguments. But I'm sure you'll agree that there's a big difference between making a map and agreeing that the argument you've mapped is a convincing one!
It's time to reflect on the quality of arguments. We'll start by looking at the level of confidence we have in the sources of information we map in basis boxes.
Some sources provide sound support for a claim:
Other sources provide only shaky support for a claim. They are weak, rather than dubious:
Some sources are unreliable and provide nil support for a claim:
© Austhink 2007. Rationale Exercises version 0.1, Sep-07
Note: these exercises are undergoing continual improvement. Next time you come back they might be a bit different.
