The Art of Thinking - Assignment Example

The Art of Thinking Question 1 The discourse contains an argument. This is because it contains both a main conclusion and basic premises. In this case, the author intends to inform the reader that it is the obligation of scientists to construct explanatory theories. Their profession gives them this responsibility. The explanation of this source of authority brings out the basic premises. Science as a discipline deals with comprehending the world yet the only way of understanding the world is through scientific explanations. This when the basic premises give rise to the main conclusion which is that scientists have a duty of coming up with scientific explanatory theories. Question 2 The first and second statements in the discourse are premises. The reader can split the discourse statement into three parts. The third statement forms the main conclusion of the author that the reader can derive deductively. The reader could only know if the character is at home if the light was on and since the lights were off, the reader can only conclude that the character was not at home. This explanation clearly indicates that the first and second statements are premises in the discourse. Question 3 Following an unsuccessful attempt by the sitting government to retain power, young officers in the army arrested Chief the Honourable M. A Nanga at the port disguised as an angler so he would not be recognised. Thus, he had dressed like an angler while going into exile. (Adapted from A Man of the People by Chinua Achebe) In the excerpt above, Odili Samalu explains that Chief the Honourable M. A Nanga was among the government ministers who had lost a general election together their entire government. However, their attempts to hold onto power precipitated into young officers in the Army staging a military coup. The officials of the overthrown regime were seeking safety some by running into exile. The excerpt clearly indicates that Chief the Honourable M. A Nanga was among the escapees as such he disguised himself as an angler to avoid recognition. The use of the term does not imply that Chief the Honourable M. A Nanga was successful in his attempt. His aim of disguising was to avoid recognition. This did not happen as army officers ultimately arrested him. The word so is in the discourse but does not lead to inference. Question 4 The red arrow represents number one on the diagram. The black arrow represent number two while purple arrow represents number three. The blue arrow represents number four on the diagram. The green circle represents the conclusion number five on the diagram where all the four argumentative statements converge. The second argument that says Jack and Mary are just friends agrees with the third argument that states clearly that the two are friends but postulates that the love relationship between them as stated by the first argument may not exist. Third statement casts doubts over the existence of love relationship between Jack and Mary but does not authoritatively rule out. The fourth statement brings clarity in the sense that the theory reinforces the doubts cast by the third argument. The theory asserts that there are only two options if people are friends yet they are former lovers. In the first scenario, they may never have dated and the second option is that they may still be dating. The first argument, second argument, and third argument disapprove the first argument. The first argument avers that they were lovers. This means that it its volition; Jack and Mary are not lovers currently. The second argument disapproves the first scenario in argument four since it is clear Jack and Mary are not lovers. The green circle, which is the conclusion, falsifies the red arrow representing the first argument. Therefore, premise two representing the black arrow, premise three representing the purple arrow, and premise four representing the blue arrow lead to a conclusion that Jack and Mary must have never been in love though the first premise representing the red arrow is false, it cannot change the conclusion. Question 5 Maxwell has to sit his final examination and get a first class for the sponsors to grant him the scholarship. In this case, sitting the final exam for Maxwell is mandatory for him to get his grades. This represents part one (I) in the diagram. After receiving the grades, it is a requirement that Maxwell should get a first class for him to receive the scholarship. This represents the second part on the diagram. Part one and two are premises in the argument and they both predetermine whether Maxwell will get the scholarship or not. To receive the scholarship, Maxwell has to do two compulsory things. First, he has to sit his final exams and then get a first class. The third part in the diagram is the conclusion, which is receiving the scholarship. The conclusion is a product of premise one and premise two. None of the two premises can lead to the conclusion independently. For instance, sitting the final exams only will not guarantee Maxwell the scholarship from the sponsors yet for him to get the first class that is a requirement for the scholarship he must sit his final exams. Question 6 Any person from Africa who wants to go to the United States must have a valid American Visa and be healthy. To get the American Visa in any American Embassy in Africa a person must have a valid passport given by his or her country. To be healthy in the American Embassies in Africa is to be free of highland malaria (yellow fever) and asthma. Therefore, lack of yellow fever and asthma makes a person healthy and with a valid US visa then he or she qualifies to travel to the US. In the diagram, one represents lack of highland malaria and two represents lack of asthma. The two premises lead to the first conclusion represented by three in the diagram. This means that the United States Embassy gives a person a clean bill of health. In addition to this first conclusion, a person still requires a valid US visa represented by five on the diagram. However, to get the US visa a person must have a valid passport from his country. The US Embassy cannot issue a visa to anybody who does not have a valid passport. Four represents the valid passport on the diagram. Question 7 The correct option is a. If an argument is deductively valid, then there are no counter-examples to it. Testing the validity of an argument requires the use of counterexamples. However, they only test if the argument is not valid. Counter-examples cannot test deductively valid arguments because there is no possibility of the premise of an argument being true yet the conclusion is false. If the premises of an argument are true then it follows that the conclusion must be true. The reliability of premises translates directly at one hundred percent rate to conclusion. Therefore, deductively valid arguments do not have counterexamples. Question 8 In all presidential and head of state elections in all countries in the world, whomever the body managing elections also called electoral body declares as the winner will assume office irrespective of any anomalies and court appeals arising from the elections. Question 9 1.) If the country receives adequate amount of rainfall then farmers will get bumper harvest. 2.) Jemimah’s grandparents were tall and had tall children and both her parents are tall, then Jemimah who has a tall husband will have all her children tall. Question 10 The most appropriate counterexample to the argument is the third statement. There are lowly academics in the publishing industry for reasons other rising to the top tip of the tertiary. It is not definite that lowly academics who do not wish to get to the tip of the tertiary cannot publish. In fact, others engage in publishing furiously for other reasons that are very far from rising to the top tip of the tertiary. Therefore, Bob Buzzard is a lowly academic who is in the publishing industry almost fulltime not because he intends to rise to the top tip of the tertiary but because he is enthusiastic about being nasty to the people in print. Bob’s enthusiasm in being nasty to fellows in print qualifies this statement as a counterexample to the argument not deductively valid. Read More