If you look closely at all the reasons and objections in Tutorial 1, you'll see that each one contains a claim. A claim which is inside or part of a reason or an objection is known as a premise.
This reason contains a claim. The claim is a premise.
Here is an alternative way to map the simple argument. It displays the premise as a distinct claim.
Premise is a technical term. In ordinary conversation people (mis)use it in many ways, but for us it has a specific meaning: a claim which is part of a reason or objection.
The key point right now is that if you look closely at reasons or objections, you'll see that they are made up of distinct claims, which we call premises.
A premise is a claim which is part of a reason or an objection.
It is not too easy to understand and it needs a bit more excitment in it to keep the user interested.
it is getting much more difficult to understand the materials
It's too simple and easy.
In my view, the claim is the originator of the argument, with the supporting evidence to follow. Therefore, wouldn't it be more appropriate to say that a reason or objection belongs to a claim rather than the other way around. You seem to order reasons/objections before claims.
(1) This is partly just a matter of getting onto the same wavelength with our terms and concepts. We're recommending that you adopt the particular ways of using terms and concepts recommended here, so that later we can build on a common foundation. (2) The important thing to understand is that even in simple arguments there can be lots of claims involved; one of these is the claim being argument for (or against), which is the conclusion; and others are working together to provide evidence for or against the conclusion; these are premises. We call a set of premises working together to provide evidence for a conclusion a "reason".
Is that: claim + claim ... => premises => support reasons/objections ?
Enter your comment here:
|Glossary | Contents | Search||
Copyright © Austhink 2003
Last updated 10-Feb-2003