Extended Passage Analysis

Argument A

Society is a survival of the fittest. Just as in nature the weak do not and should not survive, so too in society. If the weak in society cannot survive without societal (government) support, then there is no obligation on the part of society to ensure their survival. If the poor, the disabled, the aged, cannot survive on their own, then there is no obligation on the part of society to ensure their survival.

There’s a comparison between nature and society. This is a faulty analogy argument and so it is non-deductive. Looking for cogency.

Premises:

1. Nature and society are alike.
2. Nature does not ensure the survival of the weak.
3. The weak include the poor, disabled, and aged.

Conclusion: If the poor, the disabled, the aged, cannot survive on their own, then there is no obligation on the part of society to ensure their survival.

Argument B

1. If an opinion is false [b], then its being aired allows us to judge it and discover why it is false [d].
2. If it is part true and part false [b], then allowing it to be aired gives us the opportunity to challenge it and discover what is beneficial and what is harmful [e].
3. If the opinion is true [a], and it is not challenged, then it risks becoming a dead dogma, whose truth we do not understand [f].

Some opinions are true [a], false [b], and part true/part false [d].

1.Either a, b, or c.

2. If b then d.
3. If c then e.
4. If a then f.

Add: 5. If d, e, f then g.  OR If a, b, or c, then g.

Conclusion: [g] Therefore, no opinion should be suppressed.