Which technique can help in identifying assumptions in arguments?

Identifying assumptions in arguments is crucial for effectively analyzing and critiquing reasoning. The technique referred to as the "Assumption Test," also known as the "What must be true?" approach, directly targets the underlying premises that are not explicitly stated in an argument.

This approach involves evaluating what has to be true for the argument's conclusion to be valid. By posing the question of what must be true in order for the conclusion to follow from the premises, you can illuminate implicit assumptions that the argument relies on. This helps to clarify whether those assumptions are reasonable and supported by the argument presented.

For example, if an argument claims that increased funding for education will lead to better academic outcomes, the assumption might be that funding is the primary factor in academic success, which may not necessarily be the case. By using the "What must be true?" approach, one can investigate such underlying beliefs, leading to a deeper understanding of the argument's strength or weaknesses.

The other techniques, while useful in their own rights, do not focus specifically on uncovering implicit assumptions within the argument structure in the same manner as the "Assumption Test."