Reading/Equivalent

Action of this button: Generates an unsubstantiated argument that the two checked claims are semantically equivalent.  E.g:

“These claims are equivalent: ‘GMO’s are safe.’ and ‘GMO’s are benign.’.”

Claims are semantically equivalent when support or rebuttal of one respectively supports or rebuts the other.

The unsubstantiated argument is immediately presented and its status can be changed.  If the claim is controversial, then an affirming or rebutting case can be entered, e.g:

Grounds: With regard to GMO’s the words ‘safe’ and ‘benign’ are semantically equivalent.

Warrant: Where propositions use all the same words except for semantically equivalent adjectives, they are semantically equivalent.

Interface Details

Two claims to be designated as equivalent must have their check-boxes selected (click on the box and a tick appears in it).  Clicking the Equivalent button posts an unsubstantiated argument with a claim of the form:

“These claims are equivalent: ‘CLAIM_1’ and ‘CLAIM_2’.”

where CLAIM_1 and _2 are substituted with the wording of the claims whose boxes have been checked.

The new argument is opened in the editor window where you can change its status and optionally add cases.