From this perspective, the passage illustrates that deductive reasoning does not necessarily involve the element of truth.
It is summed up basically by the question of validity or invalidity of the argument. The passage provides resourceful insight into the character and aspects of syllogism and contradictions as they may play out in the rules of deduction. Further, this passage explores the meaning of induction as a way of expanding an argument by synthesizing new arguments and positions from the available positions. Structural similarities and differences between induction and deduction are explored in ways that give meaning to some of their basic qualities.
The passage provides some explanation about the place of a claim or thesis within the body of the argument. The centrality of a claim is paramount in the process of developing an argument towards a logical conclusion. It is important to establish a claim early in the argument in order to achieve the requisite level of consistency in the process of the argument. The merit of any argument is assessed from the manner in which the premises and other elements contribute to the validation of the substance of the claim. Grounds According to this passage, one of important features of evidence is the grounds. In general terms, grounds of an argument imply the facts, or evidence on which the argument is anchored. This passage establishes differences between the type of grounds of a deductive argument and one of an inductive argument. The grounds of an argument usually form the basis of determining the merit and substance of the argument. Premises and evidence are the grounds upon which deductive arguments and inductive arguments are based respectively. Backing All arguments require sufficient backing for them to hold. This passage makes the point that appropriate backing is required in order to reinforce the positions adopted by the argument. Backing usually involves the use of side arguments that are necessary for providing additional anchorage to the ideals developed by the study. It is therefore important to establish the different positions that relate to an argument, and which could be used to supply more strength to the argument. The necessity of backing in an argument is derived from the awareness of multiple possibilities within any particular field of study, or any issue that may require a logical analysis of facts (Hurley 114). Rebuttals Rebuttals are counterarguments that challenge the central concerns upheld by any given argument. Naturally, nearly all arguments must have their corresponding rebuttal argument. The strength of an argument is usually tested by the rebuttal argument. Arguments must compete with the claims provided by the rebuttal so that their real merits are supplied in a comparative analysis between the two. Applying rebuttals to different situations and arguments strengthens the value and quality of an argument. It allows the people involved in an argument to explore the vast nature of information and evidence that might provide alternative materials for the argument. In this sense, it becomes necessary to develop a habit of obtaining rebuttal arguments in order to enrich the quality of any argument. This strategy widens the perspective of the argument by supplying more information and filling the gaps that could be left within any given argument. Rebuttals are also important in clarifying on inconsistencies about arguments. Persuasion, Argument Dispute This passage distinguishes between the basic qualities of persuasion, argument, and dispute. The argument is built on various issues that relate to the differences in the forms of arguments.