10 Philosophy 2022

Philosophical Methods Test One: Arguments

Name: Lucas

Question 1. (2 marks)

In Philosophy, what is an Argument

An argument is a statement which includes a main idea which is called the conclusion and

ideas that support the conclusion which is called premises. The premises should be able to be

proven either true or false.

Question 2. (2 marks)

How does an argument differ from rhetoric?

Rhetoric uses language which connects to the reader which appeals to their emotions whereas

argument premises can should always be proved true or false. Example of emotive words are

terrible, bad, amazing.

Question 3. (6 marks)

For each of the passages below, classify them as either an argument, an explanation or rhetoric.
Give a brief justification of your answer.

a) Ukrainians are brave and love their country. They are facing a vile and despicable enemy, so
we should do everything we can to help them. (2 marks)
This statement is an example of rhetoric because the statement includes words to appeal to the reader.
These words such as brave, love their country connect the Ukrainians to positive emotions whereas
the words vile and despicable connect negative emotions towards the enemy of the Ukrainians.

b) Over 700 millimetres of rain fell on Southern Queensland in a single day causing many towns
to be cut off and leading to many people needing to be rescued. (2 marks)

This statement is an explanation because the example is a causal relationship so once the first

thing happens, the second thing happens. For example, because rain fell on southern

1|Page
10 Philosophy 2022

Queensland, this caused many towns to be cut off and leading many people needing to be

rescued.

c) For over a thousand years every king of France was called Louis. Alphonse was a King of
France during this period, so Alphonse must have been called Louis. (2 marks)

This statement is an argument because the premises can be proved true or false with the

conclusion supporting the statements. With basic research, you can find if Alphonse’s name

was Louis. It doesn’t use rhetoric language and the premises aren’t causal relationships.

Question 4. (6 marks)

Identify the premises and the conclusion in the following arguments. Fill in any unstated premises

a. Horror movies are the best type of movies because they don’t cost much money (3 marks)

Premise 1: They don’t cost much money

Unstated Premise: People like cheap

Conclusion: Horror movies are the best type movies

b. People who work on Sundays are often among the lowest paid workers and cutting their pay
is unfair, so penalty rates should not be cut. (3 marks)

Note: Penalty rates are high rates of pay that apply on weekends.

P1: People who work on Sundays are often among the lowest paid workers

P2: Cutting their pay is unfair

C: Penalty rates should not be cut

2|Page
10 Philosophy 2022

Question 5. (6 marks)

For each of the statements below, classify them as either Factual Claims, or Speaker Relative
Claims. Explain why with reference to how they could be verified.

a) I absolutely love the way Haigh’s chocolates melt in your mouth. (2 marks)

The speaker’s opinion suggests this statement is a Speaker relative claim however, the next

part of the statement is a factual claim because it can be proven true or false with seeing if

Haigh’s chocolate melts in your mouth therefore this statement is a factual claim.

b) Omicron is half as deadly as Delta, but Delta was twice as deadly as the original COVID

strain of January 2020. (2 marks)

This statement is a factual claim because with research, you can find the percentage of deaths

with Omicron, Delta and the original COVID and this would be either proven true or false.

Therefore, this statement is a factual claim.

c) I think that chocolate probably isn’t very good for my teeth. (2 marks)

This statement is a factual claim because you can find this information towards that sugar, an

ingredient in chocolate is not good for your teeth. With this information, you can prove that

this statement is a factual claim.

3|Page
10 Philosophy 2022

Question 6 (28 marks)

Read the following passage and answer the questions below.

Melbourne has some of the purest tap water in the world, while bottled water often contains
chemicals that are harmful to health. And the packaging of bottled water creates unnecessary
rubbish. Overall, I think we would be much better off if we banned the sale of bottled water.

a. Identify the conclusion, and the 3 premises (4 marks)

Conclusion: We would be much better off if we banned the sale of bottled water.

P1: Melbourne has some of the purest tap water in the world

P2: Bottled water often contains chemicals that are harmful to health

P3: The packaging of bottled water creates unnecessary rubbish

b. Give one unstated premises that the writer assumes, pointing out where in the argument it
occurs. (2 marks)

People in Melbourne should drink tap water because their tap water is one of the purest. It occurs

when it is stated that Melbourne has some of the purest tap water in the world.

c. Evaluate the premises & unstated premises for their truth & relevance. (4 marks each)

P1: Without the unstated premise, this statement isn’t very relevant because this problem is a

worldwide issue that effects more than just Melbourne. This premise can be proven true or false

because with elaborate testing, you can find if Melbourne’s tap water has contaminants compared

to other cities or countries. This premise is a factual claim.

4|Page
10 Philosophy 2022

P2: This premise is relevant because it applies to all bottled water however, this is making a

generalisation about the bottled water. Testing to find if chemicals that harm people’s health can

be done to prove whether this is true or not therefore this premise is a factual claim.

P3: This premise is a factual claim because the rubbish created from the plastic packaging of the

water bottles often end up in landfill. This premise is relevant to a crucial element of bottled water

because many people use water bottles to remove the problem of plastic waste.

Unstated Premise: The unstated premise isn’t entirely relevant because it only applies to people

who live in areas with clean/pure water. This premise is a statement that aligns with the

conclusion because it is the opposite side of the supporting argument.

d. Overall, how strong is this argument? On what grounds might it be criticised? (6 marks)

This argument is relatively strong because it uses premises that can be proven true, and that are true
to back up the evidence, however, the overall ban of plastic water bottles may be too much to
resolve this issue. A better way to resolve this issue would be to increase encouragement to use
water bottle or more sustainable options that don’t harm the environment. Premise one is only
useful to the argument to people who live in areas where the water is clean so this premise is only
partly relevant.

5|Page
10 Philosophy 2022

Total: /50

6|Page