Arguments in everyday life rarely occur in isolation. They usually come in the mid-
dle of much verbiage that is not essential to the argument itself. Everyday arguments
are also rarely complete. Essential premises are often omitted. Many such omissions
are tolerable because we are able to convey a great deal of information indirectly by
conversational implication. Nevertheless, to give a critical evaluation of an argu-
ment, it is necessary to isolate the argument from extraneous surroundings, to make
explicit unstated parts of the argument, and to arrange them in a systematic order.
This puts us in a better position to decide on the soundness or unsoundness of the
argument in question. Will develop methods for reconstructing arguments so that they may be understood and evaluated in a fair and systematic fashion.
These methods will then be illustrated by applying them to a disagreement that
depends on fundamental principles.