Argument Mapping

In prose, an argument's structure is hidden: the main claim, the reasons for it, the unstated co-premises each reason needs, and the objections against it are blended into fluent text where a broken inference reads as smoothly as a sound one. Argument mapping makes the structure explicit: the contention, the reasons that support it, the co-premises each reason depends on, and the objections and rebuttals, laid out as a tree so every link is visible. The output is an argument map. Important boundary: a valid structure does not make the premises true; the map shows structure, not truth.

When to Use

• An argument or recommendation must be evaluated for soundness before it is trusted.
• A fluent, persuasive case may be hiding a broken inference or an unstated assumption.
• A debate needs its logical structure made explicit so people argue the same point.

When NOT to Use

• Simple claims with no real argumentative structure to map.
• To judge how persuasive something is (this analyzes logical structure, not rhetoric).
• To generate ideas or options (wrong tool).
• As proof an argument is sound: a tidy map can still rest on false premises.

Instructions