There is a difference, then, between the techniques developed in Chapters 1–5 and the techniques developed in Chapters 6–7. The first five chapters presented methods of informal analysis that may be applied directly to the rich and complex arguments that arise in everyday life. These methods of analysis are not wholly rigorous, but they do provide practical guides for the analysis and evaluation of actual arguments. The chapters concerning formal logic have the opposite tendency. In comparison with the first five chapters, the level of rigor is very high, but the range of application is corre- spondingly smaller. In general, the more rigor and precision you insist on, the less you can talk about.
1. What are the chief differences between the logical procedures developed in this chapter and those developed in the chapter on propositional logic?
Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
2. If we evaluate arguments as they occur in everyday life by using the exact standards developed in Chapters 6 and 7, we discover that our everyday arguments rarely satisfy these standards, at least explicitly. Does this show that most of our ordinary arguments are illogical? What else might it show?