00:00: Now, let’s begin with the elements of a scientific argument. At the end of this module, you should be able to define its purpose, describe its composition, and then enumerate its structure. So, as it was mentioned in the introduction, we want to answer the question, what is a scientific argument? I need to say that when we hear an argument, it doesn’t imply a physical combat or a debate over an issue.
00:32: Sometimes when somebody hears, I’m going to defend my PhD thesis, it’s as if you need to go and arm yourself with some weapons to face an enemy, an opponent. That’s not the case. Rather, a scientific argument uses evidence to support a scientific idea or to refute it. In other words, it explains the procedures scientists follow to carry out their research activities and writing. So, a scientific argument is almost like a rule that researchers and scientific writers follow in developing their argument to a logical conclusion.
01:05: And generally, a scientific argument entails the use of scientific explanations, often called claims, based on empirical data or evidence to support an idea or evidence. So, in a scientific argument, we have these three parts which make up the whole understanding of what you are trying to communicate. This is why it is usually referred to as evidence-based argumentation. It is the evidence that makes the difference.
01:31: First, there is a scientific idea or a viewpoint which is followed by some form of expectation, which the researcher has at the back of his mind as the outcome or output of his research endeavour. And to do that, he goes into the field to collect data or to the laboratory to do some investigation which will be used to support his claims.