Build and audit an argument map
See this course’s project requirements
An argument-audit packet with a premise map, conditional tests, counterexamples, repaired reasoning, certainty labels, and a final evidence-based room recommendation.
Keep your working files in your own notebook or software. Save a private description, checklist, and work link in My Proof.
What to include
- Identify premises, conclusion, and assumptions.
- Test conditional direction and create valid counterexamples.
- Explain and repair irrelevant or incomplete reasons.
- Distinguish rule-based conclusions from uncertain predictions.
- Produce the final map with a clear change trigger.
Review and revise
Use these criteria to check your work and choose what to improve.
- Argument roles are correctly identified.
- Counterexamples have the required true-condition/false-result structure.
- Revisions address the actual evidence gap.
- Final conclusions follow the supplied facts without hidden assumptions.
Want more background?
The idea in everyday life
Final fictional club facts: 20 attendees; projector required; Room A 16 seats/projector/available; B 24 seats/no projector/available; C 24 seats/projector/available/access confirmed. Policy: all listed needs must be satisfied. A popular social post promotes A. No cost difference is given.
A clear map separates what you know from what must still be checked.
Build and audit an argument map: guided practice
A clear map separates what you know from what must still be checked.
Use paper or a free local text editor. This is an original fictional practice case; do not submit its records to a real service. Start this lesson with these facts, even if an earlier variation changed them. Final fictional club facts: 20 attendees; projector required; Room A 16 seats/projector/available; B 24 seats/no projector/available; C 24 seats/projector/available/access confirmed. Policy: all listed needs must be satisfied. A popular social post promotes A. No cost difference is given.
1. Apply required criteria
Mark each room against seats, projector, availability, and access.
You should see: A fails seats; B fails projector; C meets every stated need.
Required conditions should be checked before popularity.
2. Map support
Write premises and a rule leading to a conclusion.
You should see: C meets all listed needs; suitable choice requires those needs; therefore choose C under this rule.
An explicit bridge makes the argument inspectable.
3. Test objections
Evaluate the popularity of A and identify one fact that would change C’s choice.
You should see: A’s popularity does not repair capacity; loss of C’s availability would require reconsideration.
A good argument can state its own revision conditions.
4. Assemble the audit
Combine the role map, conditional test, counterexamples, repaired reasons, certainty labels, and final map.
You should see: A six-part reasoning packet supporting C with assumptions and a change trigger.
Reasoning quality includes both a defensible conclusion and a way to revise it.
What to finish
Build and audit an argument map record with the worked decisions and changed-case check.
Watch for this
Hiding a critical assumption or treating a logical structure as proof that all premises are true.
How can I tell I understand it?
Assemble a recommendation with explicit premises, assumptions, and rebuttal tests. Explain the evidence behind the result and correct any mismatch.
Quick knowledge check
Answer all 3 questions. Get at least 2 right and the lesson completes automatically.
You’ll get an explanation for each answer. Signed in? Your results save to your account.
Pass the check. We’ll save the progress.
Answer all 3 questions above and get at least 2 right. You can review the explanations and try again.
Go to the knowledge checkOptional course overview video · same video as Lesson 1
How to Argue - Philosophical Reasoning: Crash Course Philosophy #2
From CrashCourse. Watch here or open it on YouTube .
Optional course overview. Follow the written steps below at your own pace.Tools, templates, and lesson sources
Tools and templates
Tools open in a new tab so you can keep your place here.
Sources and further reading
Explore the references behind this lesson.
Source & access notes · checked 2026-09-12
Inspected premises, conclusions, and the distinction between truth and logical support.
Access: Public page or PDF inspected without payment or institutional sign-in on September 12, 2026. Optional external accounts are unnecessary for this course.
Reuse: Link and original paraphrase only. Public access does not grant blanket reuse; no provider text, figures, or exercises are reproduced.
Source & access notes · checked 2026-09-12
Inspected conditional forms, counterexamples, and deductive versus inductive inference.
Access: Public page or PDF inspected without payment or institutional sign-in on September 12, 2026. Optional external accounts are unnecessary for this course.
Reuse: Link and original paraphrase only. Public access does not grant blanket reuse; no provider text, figures, or exercises are reproduced.
Source & access notes · checked 2026-09-12
Inspected relevance, false dilemmas, weak evidence, and unwarranted assumptions.
Access: Public page or PDF inspected without payment or institutional sign-in on September 12, 2026. Optional external accounts are unnecessary for this course.
Reuse: Link and original paraphrase only. Public access does not grant blanket reuse; no provider text, figures, or exercises are reproduced.
Report a problem with this lesson
Tell us what went wrong. Please leave out personal information and private project contents.