The Little Blue Reasoning Book - Brandon Royal [25]
Dilemmas that fit the requirements for a Prisoner’s Dilemma often can be summarized as follows. The first word in each pair denotes the outcome of the first person; the second word in each pair denotes the outcome of the second person:
If both parties cooperate, they are rewarded; if they both defect, they are punished. If one cooperates, but the other defects, the cooperator is the loser (or sucker or saint, depending on your point of view) and the non-cooperator is a winner (but traitor). In true Prisoner’s Dilemma games, the winner’s payoff always exceeds the loser’s payoff (measured here in terms of fewer years served).
As highlighted, the aggregate benefit of cooperation exceeds the aggregate benefit of non-cooperation. For example, if both counterfeiters cooperate, they will serve an aggregate of 6 years of prison time (i.e., 3 + 3 = 6 years). If both counterfeiters fail to cooperate, they will serve a total of 14 years of prison time (i.e., 7 + 7 = 14 years). A middle ground arises when one person cooperates and the other doesn’t because this leads to an aggregate of 10 years of prison time (either 10 + 0 = 10 years or 0 + 10 = 14 years).
Not surprisingly, expectations play a big role in how people respond to these dilemmas. In other human endeavors, if one person defects when the other cooperates, the pair faces a major crossroads. If one of two business partners, for instance, doesn’t contribute as much as the other thought he or she would, they may have to work out a whole new arrangement. If two people pursue individual and mutually contradictory goals within a single partnership, the likelihood of “divorce” is imminent. When two people both contribute substantially to a growing relationship, “romance” can flourish.
Chapter 4
Analyzing Arguments
I can stand brute force,
but brute reason is quite unbearable.
There is something unfair about its use.
It is hitting below the intellect.
— Oscar Wilde
OVERVIEW
Arguments
What is an argument? An argument is not a heated exchange like the ones you might have had with a good friend, family member, or significant other. An argument, as referred to in logic, is “a claim or statement made which is supported by some evidence.” A claim is part of a larger concept called “argument.”
“Oh, it sure is a nice day today.” This statement is certainly a claim, but it is not an argument because it contains no support for what is said. To turn it into an argument we could say, “Oh, it sure is a nice day today. We have had nearly five hours of sunshine.” Now the claim (“it sure is a nice day”) is supported by some evidence (“nearly five hours of sunshine”).
Let’s get some definitions out of the way.
Definitions
Conclusion: The conclusion is the claim or main point that the author, writer, or speaker is making.
Evidence: The evidence includes any facts, examples, statistics, surveys, and other information or data that the author (writer or speaker) uses in support of his or her conclusion.
Assumption: The assumption is the author’s unstated belief (“unstated evidence”) about why his or her claim is right. An assumption is that part of the argument that the author, writer, or speaker assumes to be correct without stating so; it is “that which the author takes for granted.” More poetically, the assumption may be said to be “the glue that holds the evidence to the conclusion.”
THE ABCs OF ARGUMENT STRUCTURE
Tip #20: Evidence + Assumption = Conclusion. The assumption is the glue that holds the evidence to the conclusion.
The following expresses the relationship between the