Rules for writers, Tenth edition - Diana Hacker, Nancy Sommers 2021
Read with an open mind and a critical eye
Reading arguments
Academic Reading and Writing
✵ Recognizing logical fallacies
✵ Evaluating ethical, logical, and emotional appeals as a reader
✵ Questioning the evidence behind a conclusion
✵ Checklist for reading and evaluating arguments
Many of your college assignments will ask you to read and write arguments about debatable issues. The questions being debated might be matters of public policy (Should law enforcement officers be allowed to seek no-knock warrants?), or they might be scholarly issues (What role does social responsibility play in determining behavior in a pandemic?). On such questions, reasonable people may disagree.
You’ll find the critical reading strategies introduced in section 4 — previewing, annotating, and conversing with texts — to be useful as you read an argument and ask questions about its logic, evidence, and use of appeals.
6a Read with an open mind and a critical eye.
As you read arguments across the disciplines and enter into academic or public policy debates, keep an open mind about opposing viewpoints. Be curious about the wide range of positions in the arguments you are reading. Examine an author’s assumptions (ideas the author accepts as true), assess the evidence, and weigh conclusions. The following strategies will help you read with an open mind and a critical eye:
✵ Read carefully. Read to understand an author’s argument and point of view. Ask questions: What is the author’s thesis? What evidence does the author use to support the thesis? How does the author’s argument contribute to your understanding of the subject?
✵ Read skeptically. Read to test the strengths and weaknesses of an author’s argument. Ask questions: Are any of the author’s assumptions or conclusions problematic? Is the author’s evidence persuasive and sufficient? How does the author handle opposing views?
✵ Read evaluatively. Read to evaluate the usefulness and significance of an author’s argument. Put the argument to the “So what?” test (see 1c). Why does the thesis matter? Why does it need to be argued?
RECOGNIZING LOGICAL FALLACIES
When you evaluate an argument, look closely at the reasoning behind it. Some arguments use unreasonable tactics known as logical fallacies.
A hasty generalization is a conclusion based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence.
In a single year, scores on standardized tests in California’s public schools rose by ten points. Therefore, more children than ever are succeeding in America’s public school systems.
Stereotypes are hasty generalizations about a group.
All politicians are corrupt.
A false analogy is a comparison that points out a similarity between two things that are unrelated.
If we can send a spacecraft to Mars, we should be able to find a cure for the common cold.
Post hoc fallacy assumes that because one event follows another, the first is the cause of the second.
Since Governor Cho took office, unemployment within communities of color has decreased by seven percent. Governor Cho should be applauded for reducing unemployment.
Either/or fallacy oversimplifies an argument by suggesting that there are only two alternatives when in fact there are more.
Many attempted solutions to opioid addiction have not worked. Either we should stop manufacturing opioid drugs or give everyone access to naloxone, the overdose-preventing drug.
Non sequitur is Latin for “It does not follow.” When a statement or conclusion is an assertion that does not logically follow what came before it, we call it a non sequitur.
State governments should not require vaccines in schools because the flu is not usually fatal.
ACADEMIC WRITING Many hasty generalizations contain words such as all, ever, always, and never, when qualifiers such as most, many, usually, and seldom would be more accurate.