Discussion Question #1 (Repairing Arguments)

1) For this question, please come up with an argument that needs to be repaired. Look over the examples on pages 63-67. Come up with your own example and 'discuss' it as they do in the text. To accomplish this, you should understand the Principle of Rational Discussion and the concept of Repairing Arguments.


Jim: Granola bars are filling. Granola bars are cheap. Granola bars can fit in your purse.
Mary: So?
Jim: So granola bars make great snacks.
Mary: I don’t see how that makes sense.

Analysis: This is not a good argument because it doesn’t show the reasoning between the premises and the conclusion. The premises don’t show that other possibilities aren’t possible that lead to the conclusion. You could add a premise that states, “Any snack that is filling, cheap, and can fit in your purse is good.” However, Mary may not agree because he or she doesn’t like the crunchiness of a granola bar or how it can sometimes be blan tasting or how the crunchiness can be loud in a quiet place. This argument cannot be repaired because adding this premise does not make it stronger or valid, doesn’t make the premise plausible and plausible to the other person, or make the premise more plausible than the conclusion. Jim is violating the principle of rational discussion because he is not able to reason well. He just states a lot of truths about granola bars, but they don’t necessarily lead to his conclusion.