Argument Effectiveness

This continues the Argument Presentation section and is important for my book because I am taking inspiration from the strategies of the author.

◦I think that most of the arguments are very effective and valid as enough evidence has been provided. Certainly, scientists’ quotes and references from their books are effective enough so as to explain theories formulated by them and explain their stances about particular or specific.

◦The logical structure of how the author places his arguments or proves his claims is also extremely effective, according to me. He asks questions in the first chapter of the book, provides relevant examples throughout, and states his arguments at the end. He also uses credible sources to prove some claims and clarify concepts within chapters.

◦However, as I have learnt from this book, there has been no mathematical way to prove the logical arguments proposed by the author even though the author backs them up with citations from credible sources, quotations from authoritative personalities and from various stories.

◦The author himself, as can be inferred from his support of Descartes’ method, believes strongly in the scientific method of proving things. However, his argument is unproven.

For fun, I even created a small proof of a paradox in the author’s work:

Let X be the superset of sets of unproven statements and arguments.

Hypothesis 1: X ϵ X, X is unproven, meaning it is unproven that any statement U ϵ X is unproven. If U is proven, X≠ {Statements that are unproven}. It can also be thought that it is unproven that X={Statements that are unproven}.

Conclusion 1: X ∉ X.

Hypothesis 2: X ∉ X, X is proven, so X={Statements that are unproven}.

Conclusion 2: X ϵ X.

I call this the paradox of unproven entities.