In chapter 7 I learned about refuting an argument that you do not believe yourself. There are three direct ways to refute and argument and these are to show that at least one of the premises is dubious, to show that the argument isn't valid or strong, or to show that the conclusion is false. If you complete one of these three things, then you have successfully refuted the argument. An example would be: Andrew states that, "Everybody should drive prius' instead of trucks because they don’t pollute the earth and they don’t harm our ozone layer. They go just as fast as any other car and they look good too. They also get really amazing gas mileage." Phil does not agree with Andrew's argument so in order to refute it he states that," Although pruis' are good for the environment they are not able to do a lot of the jobs that a truck can such as pulling a horse trailer with two horses in it." Phil refuted Andrew's argument by showing that at least one of the premises is dubious.
Refuting an argument is hard to do, especially with someone who is being irrational. I liked the example you picked about a prius and a truck. What I liked about it is that it seems realistic. A person trying to save the environment would argue with someone who refuses to get rid of a truck. I feel the best way to refute an argument is to show that an argument is not strong. Strong arguments are hard to come by, but if someone has a strong argument, then it should be easy to defend.
ReplyDeleteRefuting an argument is hard and sometimes confusing to do. Your example about Prius and trucks is a good argument where you can find ways to refute the argument. The argument could be shown as invalid because it is not true that hybrid cars do not pollute the air. Everything pollutes the air, just Prius are less damaging to the environment compared to a truck. Prius may be a good car to care for the environment but it does not do the job as trucks, such as carrying a big family, carrying huge items in the bed of the truck.
ReplyDelete