***
Assessing conclusions and arguments involves two tasks. We should 1) look for unsound reasoning to avoid deception and we should 2) look for sound reasoning for enlightenment. Intelligent assessment of conclusions and arguments calls for a knowledge and comprehension of both these tasks.
Individuals with substantial knowledge of recognizing unsound reasoning but with little or no knowledge of recognizing sound reasoning is given to indiscriminate blurting out of names of fallacies in reply. These individuals think logical criticism is all negative, always finding fault, always accusing others of making mistakes when they believe a mistake is made. Such tendencies are harmful and counterproductive because often true conclusions are rejected because an individual has incorrectly proposed it in form. Too, I have witnessed I don?t know how many times a would-be critic offer scathing ridicule of an argument form and conclusion when the argument was presented as an inductive one and the criticism is offered as though the form was deductive. When a critic makes this mistake they look like a fool, which they probably are in terms of analyzing argument form and validity of conclusions. Unless someone helps the fool, and the fool accepts the help, they will continue on their merry way thinking they have accomplished something when in fact all they have done is harmed their own intelligence by bolstering their ignorance.
The philosophy of logic is extremely interesting, and intellectually stimulating. There are thinkers that reject accepted and sound deductive reasoning as circular in form because the conclusion is always contained in it premises. This has led to complaints from logicians that deductive reasoning accepted as valid is, in essence, begging the question. The reason logicians continue using deductive argument form is because, though its conclusion is always found in its premises the conclusion is often useful in that it helps us to grasp consequences that maybe would have gone unnoticed had we not taken the time to put two propositions together to form premises for the particular deductive conclusion. So, though deductive conclusions are always found in the premises leading to it, they are nevertheless useful in learning by making us aware of ends we may not have otherwise understood. An added help of deductive conclusions is their conclusiveness -- they are either true or false, there is no in-between.
There are also thinkers out there who reject inductive reasoning because it lacks the conclusiveness of deductive reasoning. But the fact is we are forced to apply inductive reasoning all the time, and when we do this soundly it leads to growth in knowledge and understanding because inductive reasoning helps us to measure the strength of consequences. That is to say, though inductive conclusions require some assumption we can still gain from the assumptive conclusion if we are keen to base our assumptions on probabilities rather than possibilities, while at the same time not ignoring viable possibilities.
When individuals want to learn more about sound reasoning I very much encourage taking the time to read a good book on the subject that addresses the philosophy of logic rather than just the mechanics of logic. This helps the individual better understand the world of logic and how humans live within it. This context is essential to useful logic because it gives us a chance to let logic become our mentor rather than it becoming our whipping-stick to afflict on others who may not understand logical form but do understand what they have concluded is real and true yet they find themselves unqualified to adequately communicate it. Logic helps us help these individuals and ourselves by looking for soundness where it seems lacking, before we reject what is said. Plenty of times individuals use argument forms called enthymeme. Very intelligent persons do this all the time, and if we were to stick our heads into the discussion and point to the fault of conclusions that do not follow from what is said we would then look like fools if everyone else in the discussion understands what is unstated, except for us.
Just some thoughts to ponder, for the curious.
Marvin Shilmer
