CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF ARGUMENTS English 5
M. Giordano

DIALECTICAL QUESTIONING

Identify the main claims as to type (fact, value, policy) and their method of support, if any. Are the claims consistent with each other? Is the support inductive, deductive or an appeal to authority?
If inductive, is the data sufficient to support the inference? Is the inference logically valid?
If deductive, are the terms adequate to the argument, clearly defined and consistently used? Is the line of reasoning valid? Are the major premises subject to rational critique; are they consistent with each other?
If an appeal to authority, is the authority credible and disinterested? Is the authority self-consistent? How widely endorsed is the authority and by whom? Who would reject this authority and why? What are the claims of the authority and their type? How do they support the claims of the argument? How does the authority support these claims? Are there just as credible authorities opposed to these claims?

HERMENEUTIC QUESTIONING

Discern the model or paradigm which generates the major premises. How widely is it endorsed and by whom? How powerfully does it address the issue? Does it ignore phenomena you are familiar with? Does another model or paradigm suggest itself? What premises would another one generate?

RHETORICAL QUESTIONING

If the argumentation is valid, is it convincing? Why or why not?
Identify the ethos and pathos appeals. Are they appropriate to the issue and consistent with the argument? Are they resorted to where rational support is required?

Return to: Main Content

Email to: Marco Giordano