Scientific Method and Argument

The best test of an argument is the argument’s ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

The above statement tells us of a way to test an argument. It states that it can be successfully infered about an argument’s success by its ability to convince someone with an oppossing viewpoint. At first glance the test seems promising but a carefull scrutiny of the test might weaken its stance. Many factors as the opponent’s mentality, the supporter’s mentality and even the argument’ credibilty have been left out in developing the conclusion.

Firstly the author states that the best test of an argument is it’s ability to convince someone of opposing viewpoint but he fails to take into account the various other methods that can be used to test the argument. A well organized scientific study could explicate a lot of things about the argument. Coupled with scientific experiments which yeild results and conclusions could further strengthen or weaken the credibility of the argument and thus making these methods to be more efficient in testing a certain argument.

Secondly the author does not take into account the mentality of the supporter and opponent, as convincing someone is a not an easy task. It also depends on the person who is trying to convince. Consider a well based argument is to explained to someone and the person who explains it is not so adept and thus it would considerably affect the acceptance of the argument. Also it depends on the opponents mentality on how he receives the other side of the story when he listens to the argument.

It might be the case that the opponent is too adamant to take critisism to his belief. He might pay no heed to how well the argument has been supported by scientific facts and results of various experiments. This was the case when the argument is good but the opponent is too stubborn to be convinced. Now consider the opposite case when the argument is not very well supported but the opponent is very easy to convince, which would seriously hamper the test to which the argument has been subjected.

Although the above points argue against the test but if a well based argument is able to convince the opposing viewpoint it would prove very beneficial for the argument. Further it enhances the argument so much that it would be very less likely to refuted in the future considering that it has already passed a significant test. Considering the above points a very suitable test might be created which can effectively test an argument as is already shown that the above test suffers from many inherent faults and should only be applied after many facts have been considered about the convincer and the opponent.