Week 7, Post 1
According to the Epstein, two or more claims that are come together as one claim is a compound claim.
To make a compound claim by combining two different claims with words such as "or," and "and." A claim that connects the two is called alternatives. A contradictory of a claim contains an "opposite truth-value" in any possible situation. A negation of a claim is another way of contradictory by using words like "not".
For breakfast, Paul will eat cereal with milk or he will eat dry cereal.
Using an alternative claim, the word "or" was used for two independent claims to come together.
Claim 1: Paul will eat cereal with milk.
Claim 2: Paul will eat dry cereal.
Both of the claims were not confusing because both of the premises are not false and contradicting. The compound claim is not an argument because it is not a cause and effect situation with words like "because." By creating one compound with claim 1 and claim 2, it is simpler and it makes the topic of the argument clear.
I liked the example you created in order to explain compound claims. The two individual claims were simple and easy to understand – thus when you combined the two using ‘or’ to create a compound claim, that compound claim was easy to understand as well. I do think that compound claims may have the potential to become confusing, especially if you are working with longer claims that are each a few sentences or if you are dealing with claims regarding a confusing subject that you don’t understand. Nevertheless, I feel that what you wrote about was a good stepping stone in perhaps moving up to more complicated compound claims in the future and a good way for me to see how they work.
ReplyDelete