clipped from honestargument.comThe arguments are laid out in a cascading block style and you can expand them with a text option.
Abortion is not wrong. If it's wrong, then it would be illegal. But, it's not illegal. So, it's not wrong.
Now you may feel there is something wrong with this argument, and if you have experience of logic, argumentation or philosophy, it may be obvious to you what is wrong with it. However, for many people, and in particular children, this argument might carry some weight
One of the best ways to discover the flaws in such an argument is to break it down in to its constituent parts and evaluate those parts.
First, I have to decide what the thesis of the argument is. The thesis of the argument represents what the whole argument is attempting to persuade you of, show or prove.
In this case, the thesis is clearly stated at the beginning of the argument:
I have placed the thesis in a box as the central claim of the argument. Next, I have to decide how the remainder of the argument supports this claim. In this simple argument it is clear that there are two mutually supporting premises for the claim that abortion is not wrong.
I represent the two premises as supporting the thesis by showing them connected to the thesis from below and surrounded by a green (support) box. Since the premises are both required together to support the thesis, they are displayed in the same box.
Now that the argument is a little clearer, I can begin to see if the premises actually support the conclusion (thesis). First, lets think about the premise "If abortion was wrong, then it would be illegal".
