Argument
Analysis
Your thesis project will
require you to analyze one argument from a work we have read. The student is
expected to (1) choose an argument that has significance to the author’s
thought. (2) To provide an analysis of the argument into premises, (3) evaluate the premises and formulate an
alternative version of the argument that meets the first concerns raised about
the initial premises, and to (4) Evaluate whether the revised argument is
sound. It is not a research paper or a summary essay.
Its aim is to get you to understand the argument more deeply and to formulate
and argue for a position by responding to objections. You must choose an argument from a reading we
have done, unless you get an alternative topic approved by me.
The project should have this
form:
(1) Explanation of
the role the argument plays in the work and of its significance.
(2) Identification
of the real issue involved in deciding the soundness of the argument and
identification of opposing sides on that issue.
(3) Opening
Defense of position: Briefly summarize the main reason why you will ultimately
find the argument to be sound or unsound.
II. Initial Analysis: You must present the argument in the form of
number premises and a conclusion. You should include and subarguments for the
premises in the same form.
III. Initial Evaluation. Evaluate the strength of each of the premises
and of the connection between the premises and conclusion and find the most
likely objection(s) to the argument.
IV. Revision. Revise the
premises as best you can to respond to the objections in Part III.
(Parts III and IV may be
repeated if necessary)
V. Conclusion. Give your
final evaluation of the argument’s soundness and explain any significance your
conclusion might have.
Summary
of Requirements
Sign up for
a topic. Look on the schedule for the due date. There are a limited number of
slots. If you don’t sign up, a topic may be assigned to you. If you wait too
long there may not be a slot available.
Written Option: 2-7 page
(600 to 2000 words) papers are due
You are strongly encouraged to meet with me prior to your paper to make sure you understand the basic issues and arguments involved and to get your topic approved.
Oral Option:
You must make an appointment for a 30 minute slot at least a week
before the due date, and present your analysis orally (5-10) minutes
and then be examined on it.
Example of steps II, III, IV for this argument of Socrates’s
from the Apology:
Death is one of two things. Either it is annihilation, and the dead have no consciousness of anything, or, as we are told, it is really a change--a migration of the soul from this place to another. Now if there is no consciousness but only a dreamless sleep, death must be a marvelous gain. I suppose that if anyone were told to pick out the night on which he slept so soundly as not even to dream, and then to compare it with all the other nights and days of his life, and then were told to say, after due consideration, how many better and happier days and nights than this he had spent in the course of his life--well, I think that the Great King himself, to say nothing of any private person, would find these days and nights easy to count in comparison with the rest. If death is like this, then, I call it gain, because the whole of time, if you look at it in this way, can be regarded as no more than one single night.
II. Initial Analysis:
Therefore,
Death is good.
III. Initial evaluation: Premise 1 is obviously false, in that we wake up from sleep rested while we don’t wake up from death.
IV. Revised Analysis:
The sleep analogy is really a subargument for the premise that being without consciousness cannot be bad.
1a. We don’t mind being without consciousness while we sleep.
Therefore,
1. Something cannot be bad for us if we are not conscious of it.
2. We are conscious of nothing after death.
Therefore,
Death cannot be bad.
Of course this argument could also be questioned and revised more to answer those questions. This example shows the type of steps you must take. It is not meant to show the depth of analysis expected of you, merely the type of analysis.