I. “My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the cars in his yard.
1. People do not like living next door to such a mess.
2. He never drives any of them.
3. They all look old and beat up and leak oil all over the place.
4. It is bad for the neighborhood, and it will decrease property values.”
Argument! Yes!
Conclusion: My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all cars in his yard.
Additional premises needed: If the neighbor is messy, doesn’t drive their old leaky car, then they should be forced to get rid of all their cars since it is bad for the neighborhood and will decrease property values.
Identify any subargument: Premises 2 and 4 support 5, while 3 is independent.
If people do not like living next to that mess, and if they look old and beat up and leak oil all over the place, then it is bad for the neighborhood and will decrease property values.
All of the premises support the conclusion, 1.
Good argument! No… it is a bad argument.
Although there are independent premises, I don’t think they lead to the conclusion. How does the writer know other people view it “such a mess”? Why does it matter if the neighbor “never drives” his cars? Why does it matter if they look old and leak oil? Many people own cars that are old and leaky. That doesn’t mean it is bad for the neighbor and decrease property values. The conclusion of removing their cars in their yard because of those dubious premises is a bad argument. Plus, it is the neighbor’s yard, their property and matter.
I find the exercise to be useful because I was able to break down and analyze the argument.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I agree with you that this is a bad argument because the claims can be both true or false. The owner of the house can do whatever he or she wants with his or her house. The premises could also be true but the neighbor should not be assuming things. Nobody should be forced to throw away things they do not want to just because of what one's neighbor says. I think it is his own opinion which is a subjective claim. I was a bit confused about the additional premises though.. Other than that, good job analyzing! =)
This is true that the argument is bad but i feel that that the sub argument would that 2, 3, 4, and 5 are independent and support 1 but we will not know for sure because we are not giving the correct answer.I feel like this exercise would have been more useful if we were given the right answer. Right? Overall the premises could be true and the claim could be true or false but the property is his and he can do what he wants with it. Having the neighbor say that no one wants to live next to a mess, but the neighbor is just assuming so how would the neighbor know if the other neighbors cared about the mess. Well this was a good analysis of the statement and thanks for explaining it a little more clearly.
Hello there. :) True that our posts are pretty similar. The argument is bad since it asking the the neighbor to get rid of his old cars. No conclusion should end up to an begging scene. And plus, it is his yard - his property. He has the right to do whatever he wants with his own yard and keep whatever in his yard even if they are just junk. Also, no one knows if the neighbors don't like living right next door to such a mess. Good breaking down and analyzing the argument. The exercise clearly helped me too on how to break things apart and analyze it.
Post a Comment