Introduction to Ethics

Photo: Colleen Hayes / NBC.

As the process of moral reasoning makes clear, the practice of ethics depends on justification and argumentation. In this module, we reflect on the role of argumentation in ethics (and philosophy more generally) while learning how to break down arguments into their parts. Developing your skills in argument analysis will prove extremely helpful for understanding course texts and assessing their claims.

We have three learning outcomes here. By the end of this module, you will be able to…

Explain the importance of arguments for ethics (and philosophy),
Parse arguments into premises and main conclusions, and
Construct a diagram that faithfully represents the structure of an argument.

Read This:

The Power of Critical Thinking

Context

In this course, we will be looking at a variety of argument concerning ethics, its nature, and the right thing to do. In order to help you better understand and conceptualize what you are reading, I have provided some sections from a pretty standard textbook on critical thinking.

Here Lewis Vaughn clarifies the nature of an argument, how one is broken down into premises and conclusions, and how these are linked together by inferences. He also provides some simple tips for identifying an argument's premises, conclusions, and inferences.

Finally, Vaughn shows how you can create a visual representation, or diagram, of an argument. Occasionally I will make use of argument diagrams in my videos, so it is important that you understand how they work. In addition, I do think that you may generally find argument diagrams useful when preparing arguments that defend positions of your own.

Reading Questions

As you read, keep these questions in mind:

What do people commonly mean by the word “argument”? How is this similar to and different from how Lewis Vaughn defines an “argument”?
What role do premises and conclusions play in an argument? What purpose do inferences have within an argument? How is an inference related to premises and conclusions?

Consider the following four arguments:

i.	The defendant must go to jail because he is guilty of stealing the jewels.
ii.	The defendant signed a confession, thus he is guilty of stealing the jewels. Furthermore, we know he was present at the scene of the crime.
iii.	The jewels were found in the defendant’s pockets, and they would only be there if he stole them. Therefore, he is guilty of stealing the jewels.
iv.	The defendant was present at the scene of the crime because his fingerprints were on the safe. We know about these fingerprints because the forensic report confirms it.

For each of the above arguments, do the following:

a.	Underline any conclusion indicator words;
b.	Circle any premise indicator words;
c.	Circle and denote with a C the argument’s main conclusion; and
d.	Underline and number each premise supporting that conclusion.

For each the four arguments in the previous question, assemble its diagram, putting the statements in boxes and using arrows to indicate the inferences. Be sure that your diagram clearly indicates whether multiple premises provide dependent or independent support.
Can you combine the four argument diagrams from the previous question into one main argument?

Although I strongly suggest that you write out brief answers to these questions, you do not have to turn in written responses. You do, however, need to be prepared to answer questions like these on module quizzes and the unit exams.

References

Vaughn, L. (2009). The power of critical thinking: Effective reasoning about ordinary and extraordinary claims (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Watch This:

Video 1	Video 2
Video 3	Video 4
Video 5

Do This:

Module 3 Quiz Due: September 11
5 Tweets this Week Due: September 11
Unit 1 Exam Due: September 12
Submit the Unit 1 Exam here!

Curious for More?

Mastering the art of parsing arguments and making argument diagrams requires some practice. So feel free to work on these skills with this problem set (and its solutions):

Diagramming Arguments