T3.2: 2 of 3

Let's start with that old fav:

Dark chocolate is loaded with health-promoting polyphenols -- anti-oxidants that may help lower blood pressure and promote vascular health. Cocoa has more polyphenols than red wine or green tea. So, dark chocolate is a superfood that contributes to long-term health. (Source: Source: San Jose Mercury New.)

Being gullible, and a dark chocolate lover, I believe it all. And I now want to argue as follows. (You may beg to differ; but I'll bring you into the mix later!)

So, attribute the following reasoning to me:





































Now, after I've downloaded the new Schemeset for 3.2. (It should still be on the desktop. Otherwise, go back to exercise 1.1c for all the downloads.)

I get this:





























Missing Premises

I just claimed that my argument was cogent. That would mean the it's a strong one with true premises. But is it really? I'm not so sure. Let's start considering potential problems...just like you should for any real-life reasoning.

To begin, I don't know if there are other factors for quality food besides the ones of taste and health. Maybe some would say that chocolate is not such a great food for humans because it is a bit expensive for most of the world. Others would say that we exploit the third world growers when we force them to harvest the cocoa bean.

But, at least for today, I'm going to deny all of this. In fact, I've just been assuming (and you have too?) that health and taste are the only important factors for assessing the quality of a food. This is a kind of missing premise. It may not be true, but for this reason it's good to try and make our hidden assumptions explicit. Then we can examine them!

Try this...