Tell me if you have been in this situation with your kids yet: “Dad (or Mom), ___________ says that the existence of evil proves there is no God.” And then your child regurgitates the argument as presented by his friend or teacher. Or, there is this one: “Science has done away with our need for God.” Oh yeah, and this one too: “There are textual and historical errors in the Bible, therefore it cannot be trusted nor can it be proved to be God’s word.” And I could go on. If you haven’t been there yet as a parent, you soon will be.
Our children are looking for real answers, and we need to give it to them. The world is bombarding them with intellectual arguments that sound persuasive and convincing. How will you combat them? If we want our children to think well, we as parents have to think well. In this blog post, I want to give you some advice on how to evaluate an argument, so that when the time comes, you can teach your children how to do the same. How important is this? It could save your child the shipwreck of their faith one day.
1. Identify the Claim- What is the person trying to argue and convince you is true? In other words, what is the conclusion of their argument? This is important, because many times, people misunderstand arguments and statements because they don’t read them carefully enough. They only read what they want to read or hear what they want to hear.
2. Identify the Premises- These are the reasons that the person offers in support of their claim. In other words, it is why the person thinks their conclusion is true.
3. Define Key Terms- Make sure you understand what the person means when they use certain key words. This is important because the two of you may disagree as to what a certain term may mean and how it can be used. It is also important because you may think the person means one thing, and they actually mean something vastly different.
4. Evaluate the Argument- Check to see if the argument is valid. By valid I mean that the conclusion logically follows from the premises. This is not to say that the person may not have false premises, but that IF the premise is true, THEN the conclusion is true. This should then lead you to check if the argument is sound; is it logically valid and are the premises true. To do this, we need to follow a certain line of thinking:
a. Does the conclusion follow from the premises- Can you think of a case where the premises are true and the conclusion false? If so, the argument is not deductively valid.
b. If the argument is not deductively valid, try to identify the gap
c. If the argument is not valid, then it doesn’t matter whether the premises are true or not.
5. Check the Premises- Are they true? Here is how you can tell:
a. Test its truth- What reasons are there to think that they are true? False? Do you need to ask more questions to find out whether it is true or false?
b. Check the “universal generalizations”- These are statements like “all people are mortal,” or “those who believe in spiritual things believe in God.” We then have to ask, “is this always true?” It may or may not be. If you can find a case where it is not true, then the universal generalization is false.
6. Check for Logical Fallacies- A logical fallacy is an error in logic in which an argument is made off of wrong premises, or incorrectly connects premises to a certain conclusion. Some of the most common logical fallacies are as follows:
a. Begging the question- This is when premises are passed on as being valid without any supporting evidence.
b, False dilemma- This is an oversimplification that reduces several alternatives to only two polar choices. “You either have to believe________ or __________.”
c. Hasty generalization- This is drawing conclusions from too little evidence and often relies on stereotypes. “All Scotsmen wear kilts.”
d. Non sequitur- This is a Latin phrase that means “it does not follow.” It is a conclusion that does not follow from the premises upon which it is founded. “If these were true Scotsmen, they would be wearing kilts.”
e. Bandwagon- This is supporting a claim because “everyone” else does.
f. Red herring- (This one is my personal favorite) This is when a person tries to avoid the main argument by trying to divert the debate to another issued through tangents. “Yes, judge, I did steal that car, but I love my wife and tuck my kids in at night.”
g. Slippery slope- This is when a proposed step in the argument will set off an uncontrollable chain of events that will lead the argument into a tailspin. “If you don’t stop watching horror movies, you are going to kill people.”
h. Straw man- This is when a person distorts, misrepresents, or exaggerates another person’s position in order to more easily refute it. If you attack the misrepresented position, then you can show how superior your view is. “Calvinism can’t be true because it makes everyone robots.”
These are just a few of the logical fallacies. In closing, if the argument is deductively valid and the premises are true, then it is a good, sound argument and you are rationally required to accept it. If it is not, then you are rationally required to reject it!