3.b.

Analyzing Arguments

• Help you analyze historical arguments. Once you've determined the thesis question and thesis behind an argument, you can use this information to analyze the quality of the argument.
• Help you construct your own historical arguments by helping you understand what makes a good historical argument.

Consider this thesis question, which is the one Frank Tannenbaum asked in From Slave to Citizen:

How did differing patterns of slavery in the Americas lead to differing patterns of post-emancipation race relations in the Americas; specifically, how did these differing historical patterns of slavery make post-emancipation Latin America a better place for people of African descent than the post-emancipation United States?

What are the premises underlying it?

• There were differing patterns of slavery in the Americas
• These led to differing patterns of post-emancipation race relations
• Latin America is a better place for people of African descent than the United States

Now consider this thesis:

As evident in patterns of emancipation, slavery (and hence post-emancipation race relations) in the United States was harsher than in Latin America because -- due to a legacy of Catholicism and Roman law -- Latin American slavery recognized to a greater degree the moral value of the slave.

What is the "road map" for this paper? That is, what is the chain of reasoning this paper must pursue if it is to demonstrate the veracity of its thesis?

1. There were differing patterns of slavery in the Americas
2. These determined differing patterns of post-emancipation race relations
3. Latin America is a better place for people of African descent than the United States

Note that thus far the paper is structured around the premises underlying the thesis question. The veracity of these need to be established before any further claims can be made.

1. Slavery in the United States was "harsher" than slavery in Latin America.
2. Differences in harshness were due to differences in the degrees to which the institution of slavery recognized the "moral value" or humanity of the slave.
3. Differences in the degrees to which slavery recognized the "moral value" or humanity of the slave resulted from differing religious and legal institutions; Latin America was less harsh due to a legacy of Roman law and Catholicism.

Note that these are all new claims, which can only be made once the "thesis premises" have been established. Note that much of the paper must deal with simply establishing that the thesis question may be asked.

How to evaluate this argument:

• Are there any ill-defined terms in the thesis question or thesis? Are there any fuzzy concepts which may make analyzing the veracity of claims difficult or impossible? In this instance, I can find two:
• What is "harshness" and how is it measured?
• What does it mean to recognized the "moral value" of the slave?
• Is the logic of the "road map" valid? If the logic of any step in the road map is not valid, the argument may fail, regardless of the veracity of its individual claims.
• Is the veracity of each step of the "road map" demonstrated? If any step of the road map is not sufficiently demonstrated, every conclusion which succeeds it is suspect.