An argument is a support relationship
An argument offers one or more claims as reasons to accept another claim. The conclusion is what those reasons are meant to establish. A premise is a claim used as a reason; it need not be certain or even true to function as a premise. Identifying an argument describes what the speaker is doing before deciding whether the reasoning succeeds.
A passage can contain an explanation without arguing for its central claim. “The glass broke because it was struck” treats the breakage as accepted and explains why it happened. “There are fragments on the floor, so the glass probably broke” uses evidence to establish that a breakage occurred. Ask what is being taken for granted and what the writer is trying to establish.
Follow support, not sentence order
Words such as therefore, hence, and consequently often introduce conclusions. Because, since, and given that often introduce premises. They are clues, not mechanical labels: “since Tuesday” marks time, and a conclusion can appear before its reasons. Try the support test: does the author use claim A to support claim B, or B to support A?
An intermediate conclusion has two jobs. It receives support from an earlier reason and then supports a further conclusion. A concession acknowledges something potentially inconvenient without accepting the opponent’s final claim. An opposing position may be reported so that the author can reject it. Do not attribute every sentence in a passage to the author as an endorsed premise.
Represent the structure in plain language
Reduce the passage to “Because [reason], we should accept [conclusion].” Keep the author’s degree of confidence. Probably is weaker than certainly, some is weaker than all, and should is a recommendation rather than a prediction. Then ask which additional statements support, qualify, or challenge that main relationship.
When two premises work together, preserve both. “The room is reserved only for members” and “Ana is not a member” jointly support excluding Ana under the rule. Neither statement alone establishes that result. By contrast, separate witnesses might offer independent support for the same observation.
Worked example
The exhibition can be moved to the east hall without paying a rental fee. Moving it would therefore reduce venue costs. We should move it, provided the east hall offers adequate access for visitors.
- Premise
- The east hall has no rental fee. This is offered as evidence about costs.
- Intermediate conclusion
- Moving would reduce venue costs. The author infers this, although other moving costs could matter.
- Main conclusion
- We should move, conditional on adequate visitor access. This is the ultimate recommendation, not an unconditional command.
- Open question
- A cost saving supports a recommendation only alongside assumptions about other relevant benefits, costs, and constraints.
Check your understanding
Take it into practice
Before answering an exercise, state the main conclusion in one sentence and point to the words that support it.