Login
OR
Don't worry. We'll fix this for you!
In verbal reasoning, an argument is a set of statements where some statements (called premises) provide support or reasons for another statement (called the conclusion). Evaluating arguments means critically examining these statements to decide whether the conclusion logically follows from the premises.
Why is this important? Competitive exams often test your ability to think clearly and logically. Being able to evaluate arguments helps you avoid being misled by weak reasoning and choose the best answer quickly and accurately.
For example, consider this everyday argument:
"The temperature in Delhi has been rising steadily over the past decade. Therefore, the city will face severe heatwaves next summer."
To evaluate this argument, you need to identify the premises, the conclusion, and any assumptions, then decide if the conclusion is well-supported.
Every argument has three key components:
Understanding these parts helps you analyze arguments step-by-step.
graph TD Premises --> Conclusion Assumptions -.-> Premises Assumptions -.-> Conclusion style Premises fill:#f9f,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px style Conclusion fill:#bbf,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px style Assumptions fill:#fbf,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px,stroke-dasharray: 5 5
In this flowchart, the premises lead directly to the conclusion, while assumptions act as hidden links that connect the premises and conclusion logically.
When evaluating an argument, you judge its logical strength-how well the premises support the conclusion. A strong argument has premises that make the conclusion very likely to be true. A weak argument has premises that do not adequately support the conclusion.
Sometimes arguments contain errors in reasoning called logical fallacies. These are common traps that make an argument invalid or weak, even if it sounds convincing.
| Fallacy | Definition | Example | How to Spot |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hasty Generalization | Drawing a broad conclusion from insufficient evidence. | "I met two people from city X who were rude; therefore, everyone from city X is rude." | Look for conclusions based on too few examples. |
| Circular Reasoning | The conclusion is used as a premise without proper support. | "Reading is beneficial because it is good for you." | Check if the argument repeats the conclusion as a reason. |
| False Cause | Assuming one event causes another without proof. | "Since the government changed, unemployment increased; therefore, the government caused unemployment." | Look for cause-effect claims without evidence. |
Step 1: Identify the premises.
Premise 1: All cars in the city run on petrol.
Premise 2: Ravi's vehicle is a car.
Step 2: Identify the conclusion.
Conclusion: Ravi's vehicle runs on petrol.
Step 3: Check the logical flow.
The premises clearly support the conclusion because if all cars run on petrol and Ravi's vehicle is a car, it logically follows that Ravi's vehicle runs on petrol.
Answer: The argument is logically sound with clear premises leading to the conclusion.
Step 1: Identify the conclusion.
The conclusion is that the metro line caused more traffic congestion.
Step 2: Identify the premises.
Premise: The metro line opened last month; traffic congestion increased since then.
Step 3: Analyze the reasoning.
The argument assumes a cause-effect relationship based only on timing, without evidence that the metro line actually caused the congestion.
Step 4: Identify the fallacy.
This is a false cause fallacy, also known as "post hoc ergo propter hoc" (after this, therefore because of this).
Answer: The argument is weak due to the false cause fallacy.
Step 1: Identify premises and conclusion.
Premise: 90% of people who exercise daily report feeling healthier.
Conclusion: Exercising daily improves health.
Step 2: Assess evidence quality.
The survey shows a strong correlation but does not prove causation. People who feel healthier might be more likely to exercise, or other factors may be involved.
Step 3: Consider assumptions.
The argument assumes that exercise causes better health, ignoring other possibilities.
Answer: The argument is moderately strong but requires more evidence to confirm causation.
Step 1: Identify premises and conclusion.
Premise: Petrol price increased by 10 INR per litre.
Premise: Public transport usage has increased.
Conclusion: Petrol price hikes cause more public transport usage.
Step 2: Identify assumptions.
The argument assumes no other factors influenced public transport usage, such as improved services or seasonal changes.
Step 3: Evaluate the assumption's impact.
If other factors exist, the conclusion may not be fully supported.
Answer: The argument depends on the hidden assumption that petrol price is the sole cause, which weakens its strength.
Step 1: Understand the claim.
The claim is that online education is less effective.
Step 2: Evaluate each argument's support.
Step 3: Identify the weakest argument.
Argument 3 is weak because it does not support the claim and even suggests online education can be preferable for some.
Answer: Argument 3 is the weakest and can be eliminated quickly.
When to use: At the start of any argument evaluation question.
When to use: When reading statements that seem too absolute.
When to use: When under time pressure during exams.
When to use: When evaluating argument strength.
When to use: When an argument feels incomplete or weak.
Progress tracking is paywalled — subscribe to mark subtopics as understood and save your streak.
Go to practice →
Your Score
Your Rank
| Rank | Name | Score |
|---|
