Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site alice.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!alice!ark From: ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig) Newsgroups: net.politics,net.misc,net.philosophy Subject: The missing premise Message-ID: <3922@alice.UUCP> Date: Fri, 28-Jun-85 16:58:15 EDT Article-I.D.: alice.3922 Posted: Fri Jun 28 16:58:15 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 29-Jun-85 04:25:53 EDT Organization: Bell Labs, Murray Hill Lines: 23 Xref: watmath net.politics:9633 net.misc:8170 net.philosophy:1995 There is a type of argument that really states two views, one explicitly and the other implicitly. This argument generally takes the form: A, therefore B. The explicit view is obvious. The implicit view is that the speaker holds the belief necessary to justify the statement. To clarify this, consider an example: "The country's cat ranchers are in trouble due to competition from strays. Therefore, the government should subsidize cat ranching." In addition to the obvious, this speaker has implied the belief that whenever some group of businesspeople is in trouble, the government should step in with subsidies. But by leaving this premise unstated, the speaker has made it much harder to dispute. Keep an eye out for arguments of this sort. They can be tricky.