WARNING:
JavaScript is turned OFF. None of the links on this concept map will
work until it is reactivated.
If you need help turning JavaScript On, click here.
This Concept Map, created with IHMC CmapTools, has information related to: objection-schemes-materials, Carl was not drunk when he caused the accident defeats by contradiction Carl was drunk when he caused the accident, ???? therefore (by contra- diction) Carl was not drunk when he caused the accident, measurement proves Carl's blood alcohol was not above the legal limit, bats are using their eyes when avoiding obstacles therefore (ArgScheme: modus ponens) blind- folded bats cannot avoid obstacles, it is not the case that bats are using their eyes when avoiding obstacles defeats by counter argument bats are using their eyes when avoiding obstacles, Carl was drunk when he caused the accident is hypo- thesis, Carl was drunk when he caused the accident therefore (ArgScheme: modus ponens) Carl's blood alcohol was above the legal limit, if Carl was drunk when he caused the accident, then Carl's blood alcohol was above the legal limit therefore (ArgScheme: modus ponens) Carl's blood alcohol was above the legal limit, blindfolded bats can avoid obstacles therefore (ArgScheme: modus tollens) it is not the case that bats are using their eyes when avoiding obstacles, x is not trustworthy, has specific interests, etc. questions (ad hominem AU=y) ????, enabler therefore (AU: x) claim, enabler therefore (AU: x) claim, my scientific experiment proves blind- folded bats can avoid obstacles, it is not the case that bats are using their eyes when avoiding obstacles defeats by contradiction bats are using their eyes when avoiding obstacles, if bats are using their eyes when avoiding obstacles, then blindfolded bats cannot avoid obstacles therefore (ArgScheme: modus ponens) blind- folded bats cannot avoid obstacles, Carl's blood alcohol was not above the le- gal limit therefore (ArgScheme: modus tollens) Carl was not drunk when he caused the accident, Carl was not drunk when he caused the accident defeats by counter argument Carl was drunk when he caused the accident, if bats are using their eyes when avoiding obstacles, then blindfolded bats cannot avoid obstacles therefore (ArgScheme: modus tollens) it is not the case that bats are using their eyes when avoiding obstacles, Paul is not a rational human being negates (ObjScheme) Paul is a rational human being, Key and LAM conventions see click on the small icon under this text box