The previous video was about
understanding how an argument is built so we can read it critically and see
if the argument is logical. (Make sure you watch that video first.) Now, one way to analyze
the argument is to look closely at the evidence the writer presents
and ask if it is relevant and sufficient. So, stick around and let's talk about
evaluating the evidence. Hi! Welcome to Snap Language. Marc Franco here. So, to build an argument, we present a series of claims
that lead to a conclusion. Of course, the premises
in the argument must support the conclusion
in a way that makes sense... um... of course! You'd be surprised, though. Even an argument that "appears"
to make sense may not be really strong; it may not even be a valid argument. Let's look at a fairly obvious
example first. "Eckstown is a great place to live. "It has many parks and recreation areas
where you can relax and exercise. "Its parks have vast green areas
including trees and wild flowers. "The Eckstown Public Library was founded
in 1841, making it one of oldest libraries in the area." In this simple paragraph,
the topic is "Eckstown." The point the author wants to make
is that Eckstown is "a great place to live." The author presented three premises
to support this conclusion. Now, looking at each premise
closely, the first is that Eckstown has many parks and
recreation areas. That's actually good evidence. Most people would agree that this
makes any town a good place to live. The next premise is that
the parks are green and beautiful. Well, that's more information
about the parks still. What else is there? The final premise is that
Eckstown has an old library. That's great, but... the conclusion
is that it's a great place to live. Having an old library is interesting, but it's not quite *relevant*
to that conclusion. That's not very closely related
to the claim; it doesn't provide adequate support. So, "pretty parks" is good evidence. An "old library?"... not so much. Is that all? Typically, when you think of a good
place to live, you think of safety, good jobs and schools, shops and restaurants, good transportation, and so forth... The author here said "nice" things
about Eckstown, but one relevant piece of evidence isn't
quite enough to support a conclusion. [snap] "Eckstown is a very safe place to live. "Take a quick stroll around town,
and you will likely run into friendly and helpful people. "A study showed a 60% decrease in robberies and burglaries
in recent years. "No violent crimes were
reported last year." What's the point (or the conclusion) here? Does the writer present sufficient evidence
to support that conclusion? Is the evidence relevant to the conclusion? Pause the video and see
if you can answer these questions... Did you pause the video? The main point here is that Eckstown is
a safe place to live. Starting from the bottom here,
no one reported any violent crimes last year. Yes, that's relevant to being a safe place. But what about previous years? Maybe last year was different somehow? The writer also mentioned
no *violent* crimes. How about other types of crimes? But, overall, no violent crimes
could mean it's a safe place. So, let's say it's okay evidence for now. Besides, we must consider
all the evidence, so let's continue... There was a 60% reduction in crimes! That sounds good... Well... that's 60% of what number? If there were, say, 1,000 crimes before, 60% fewer than 1,000
is still a lot of crimes. A writer often includes a study
and statistics or data because they provide strong
support to a claim and readers tend to believe
this type of information. As critical readers, we know sometimes
it only *sounds* good. We still need to ask questions to see if any piece information
truly supports the main point regardless where the information
comes from. Finally, you'll run into a lot of
friendly, helpful people in Eckstown. Eh! The point is that it's a safe place,
not how nice the people are. As you can see, even when it *appears*
there's good information to support a conclusion, you should
always evaluate that evidence. Did the author present
sufficient information? Is all the information good
and relevant to the conclusion? In this paragraph?... Uh... not so much. [snap] I'm not saying you should never believe
anything you read. If we trust the source, it's very likely
the writer will do their best to support their claims and provide
sufficient and relevant information. But we don't want to learn something
that's not very accurate, right? We don't want people to persuade us
to believe something unless they give us very good
reasons to do so... So, we should always read critically. Always make sure conclusions are
logical and accurate... and supported by sufficient
and relevant information. Is that all? Yes, pretty much!... so, the next time you read
something, look closely! I often put extra information in the description box below
a video, so take a look. There are more things you can
do to read critically, but that's all for this video. What do you do to read critically? Maybe you do something
I didn't mention here, so put it in the comments. For now, click that "like button" and subscribe to Snap Language
on YouTube. And read critically... ... use those critical eyes... Yeah... Bye!
