What is the primary objective of an argument?

Question: What is the primary objective of an argument!?

this is what I wrote!.!.!. Does it sounds right!?

The primary objective of an argument is to persuade the opponent that your conclusion is sound and fair!. You will demonstrate that your argument is sound by providing facts in the premises and in which it will support the conclusion!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

And how do you "persuade" your opponent!? In the "art" of argumentation!.

First, argumentation requires the "art" of non-contradictory identification, or "logic!."

Second, an argument requires premises!. A premise must not only be "valid", which requires logic, but in relationship to other propositions (premises) it must also be "sound," which also requires (more) logic!.

"A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false!. Otherwise, a deductive argument is said to be invalid!.
"A deductive argument is sound if and only if it is both valid, and all of its premises are actually true!. Otherwise, a deductive argument is unsound!."
http://www!.iep!.utm!.edu/v/val-snd!.htm

http://phil240!.tamu!.edu/LectureNotes/6!.1!.!.!. See page 5 for "valid" combinations of propositions!.

So the "art" in argumentation is get all of this right!. THEN and only after "getting it right" can you start to use fallacies (if you are dishonest) to catch your opponent!.

Sometimes we all use fallacies not knowing they are fallacies!. Someone who wishes to win at any cost will learn as many fallacies as he/she can, and will use them!.

So the last part of the "art" of argumentation is to know the fallacies your opponent may use against you!.
http://www!.iep!.utm!.edu/f/fallacy!.htm See the list!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

No, no, no, no!.!.!. I can see how you came to that conclusion, but please, let me show you a different perspective on an arguement!. What if you are wrong about what it is you are arguing about!? Would you prefer that your error be passed on to the person you are arguing with by convincing them your arguement is true!? Or would you rather that, if you were wrong, that you would be corrected and, having been corrected, you furthered your self and your understanding of the world!. I suppose that when it really comes down to it, if your ultimate goal is deception, then the primary objective would be to persuade the other person!. But if your ultimate goal is of good moral substance and you would like to further complete your own education of this universe, then the primary objective should be for the Truth to win, for BOTH arguers to come to a realized consensus!. This will not happen every time, mostly due to this method most arguers use which is to just be the winner no matter what the actual truth of the matter is!. And this leads often to feelings of loathing, acts of violence, and the prevailing of ignorance!. Some one once said, "If you fight evil with evil, then evil always wins!." I think that is appropriate in this situation as well!.!.!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

No, no, no, no, no!. You've got it ALL WRONG!

The primary goal is to speak louder than your opponent, and keep escalating the argument until it is so loud that everyone in the room can hear, then wait until they say something really awkward, and then just pause, look at him and walk away leaving them really embarrased in front of everyone else!.

THAT is the realy purpose of arguing!. Everything else is just gravy!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

seems to me that the primary objective of an argument is whatever is named as the primary objective within the argument!.!.!.

outside of that, the primary objective of arguments in general is to fulfill the primary objectives set out in the arguments in question

beyond that, even, i suppose the rule might be that an argument has to have a primary objectiveWww@QuestionHome@Com

To prove a point or make a point!.
To stand up for what you believe in!.
To defend your beliefs!.
To express your own displeasure or disagreement!.
To stimulate debate and discussion!.
To challenge someone elses beliefs!.
For me its NOT about making someone else agree with me or persuade anyone that my conclusion is sound!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I agree with what you wrote!. I was thinking something simular but persuading the person I am arguing with to see my point and accept it, came to my mind!. You did very well at explaining it!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

It sounds right, but If I were in you, I will rather write the following:

!.!.!.!.You will demonstrate that your argument is sound by providing facts and relevant examples!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

that sounds about right!. the primary objective is to prove that you're right and they're wrong or at least prove that your argument is betterWww@QuestionHome@Com

Sounds good except you have to say conclusion is MORE sound and fair then the opponents!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Oh!.!.!. I thought the primary objective of an arguement was to kick some losers ***!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I agree with the_s1ngularity!. On top of all the reasons already posted I sometimes argue to learn!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

winning , driving on ones pointWww@QuestionHome@Com

To WIN!!!!!! Every1 likes to Win!Www@QuestionHome@Com

to win or get last word in!.!.!.!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

you said it better then i could've!. good job! :)Www@QuestionHome@Com