Why Should Countries Have Borders?

Part 1 

The argument chosen for this discussion is derived from an article in the Los Angeles Times namely “Why borders matter &#8212, and a borderless world is a fantasy” by Hanson (2016). The main purpose of the argument presented in the article is to illustrate the importance of countries having borders. Normally, people have diverse perspectives on given topics. One such example is the topic that involves the importance of countries having borders whereby some may argue for or against the notion. The opinions in the argument are coined from the contemporary ideology that involves the belief that a world without borders may exist. Written in retrospect to this idea, the argument is fundamentally inclined towards the need to show the prominence of countries having borders. It is crucial to understand that through discussing why countries should have borders, the argument enables the provision of a platform that can shape or change the opinions and views of different individuals on this particular topic. Therefore, the primary incentive of this argument is to provide facts and information that showcase the significance of a country having borders through articulating accurate thoughts reverently and politely. 

Based on the flow of ideas and logic in the argument of why borders matter as presented by Hanson, it would be prudent to state that the argument is deductive in nature. The argument uses several premises as the basis for reasoning and presenting an accurate conclusion on why countries should have borders. A deductive argument is one that entails reasoning on singular or several statements to reach a conclusion that is true and logical ( Habernal, & Gurevych, 2016) . The author in this argument makes use of various reasons and facts that aim to convey a rational explanation on why it is pivotal for borders to exist in a country and why their existence is of utmost importance. On the other hand, Inductive reasoning is where an argument is supposed to have a strong foundation such that if its premises were true, then the conclusion would be highly accurate. In layman terms, in an inductive argument, most of the facts presented are evidence to support the certainty of the conclusion ( Habernal & Gurevych, 2016) . Using the above definition, the argument on “why borders matter — and a borderless world is a fantasy” by Hanson (2016) cannot be classified as inductive as the author does not make use of varying pieces of evidence to show why borders matter for any country. 

There are two major fallacies that the author mainly employs in this argument. These are the circular thinking fallacy and sweeping generalizations fallacy. The reason for stating that the argument uses circular thinking fallacy is because it is presented in a spherical manner whereby the premise is typically restated in the conclusion in trying to provide lucidity in understanding the importance of countries having borders ( Bisquert, de Saint-Cyr, & Besnard, 2019) . On using sweeping generalizations fallacy, the argument is mainly based on generalized and stereotypical facts and statements which provide the basis for reasoning on why countries should have borders.  

Part 2 

The argument on the importance of why borders matter strongly aligns with the major philosophical theory of pragmatism. Throughout the argument, there is a systematic flow of ideas and thoughts presented by the author to explain that the existence of borders is the most desirable option with the most evident benefits for any country. The author depicts the argument in such a manner that it aligns with the philosophical theory of pragmatism. The theory of pragmatism puts emphasis on the need to select the option that has the most significant benefits ( Shusterman, 2016) . Hanson argument highlights choosing to have borders for a country as the most advantageous and thus affirming that the argument is aligned with the philosophical theory of pragmatism. 

In improving the quality and presentation of the argument, I would purpose to make use of the philosophical theory of logic. The theory of logic involves a systematic and complex process of cognitive reasoning in the presentation of articulate and accurate information or argument ( Shusterman, 2016) . Using logic to change and improve the way the argument is presented would enhance the author base of reasoning by providing a wide scope of platforms to convey thoughts and opinions. By utilizing the theory of logic, the author of an argument will organize thoughts strategically and eloquently which helps in strengthening the impact of the ideas being presented. For instance, in arguing why borders are crucial for countries, logic will provide the author with a multitude of diverse perspectives that can be used coherently to persuade the audience why borders are important aspects for nations. Additionally, the philosophical theory of logic will enable the arguer to deeply reflect on the topic of discussion before presenting the argument points.  

Moreover, employing logic in any argument will make the points elaborate and understandable to the audience. Logic plays a fundamental role in ensuring the successful presentation of any argument or discussion. Applying logic will contribute to the introduction of new criteria and principles that are cardinal in the effective presentation of the argument. In the article by Hanson (2016), logic would have enabled the presentation of new and significant points such as the fact that borders are important aspects that influence the economic prosperity of a country. In the argument of why borders matter (Hanson, 2016), the author focused on presenting a generalized view of why borders are important. These included mentioning stereotypic facts such as “Where borders are drawn, power is exercised,” (Hanson, 2016). However, using a logical point of view in presenting the argument, the writer would have noticed that borders have social, political and economic significance to a country. The application of this philosophical theory would open up new areas that the argument could be founded on, with the objective of showing how the elimination of borders is not a positive advancement for any nation and its occupants. These are improvements that could be witnessed in the argument if the author had extensively applied the philosophical theory of logical reasoning in the creation of the argument on why countries should have borders and how a ‘borderless world’ will remain to be an elusive imagination.  

References 

Bisquert, P., de Saint-Cyr, F. D., & Besnard, P. (2019, June). Assessing Arguments with Schemes and Fallacies. In International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (pp. 61-74). Springer, Cham. 

Habernal, I., & Gurevych, I. (2016, August). Which argument is more convincing? Analyzing and predicting convincingness of Web arguments using bidirectional LSTM. In  Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)  (pp. 1589-1599). 

Hanson, V. D. (2016). Op-Ed: Why borders matter — and a borderless world is a fantasy. LA Times. Retrieved from: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-hanson-borders-20160731-snap-story.html 

Shusterman, R. (2016).  Practicing Philosophy: Pragmatism and the philosophical life . Routledge.