Structure of Arguments

Week 4, Post 1

On page 235, in the Exercises for Structure of Arguments, I chose the third argument to analyze.

Las Vegas has too many people. 1 There's not enough water in the desert to support more than a million people. 2 And the infrastructure of the city can't handle more than a million: The streets are overcrowded, and traffic is always congested; 3 the schools are overcrowded, and new ones can't be built fast enough. 4 We should stop migration to the city by tough zoning laws in the city and county. 5

Argument! Yes, Las Vegas is too populated.

Conclusion: Migration to the city and county should be stopped with laws.

Additional premises needed? If Las Vegas has a numerous amount of people, there is not enough water for more than a million people. If the streets are overcrowded and traffic is congested then a law should stop migration to the city.

Identify any subargument: Claims 2 and 4 are independent and both support 5.

Good argument! Yes, the premises are plausible and the argument is valid. It has also provided descriptive claims which supports the conclusion.

I found this exercise to be useful because it allowed me to break apart the argument into different claims and look at each claim individual. I was able to detect which ones were independent claims from the ones that were too vague to be independent. I was also able to differentiate the premises, subarguments, and conclusion from one another through this exercise. I got a better understanding of how arguments should be analyzed and what I need to look for and include in arguments.