This principle is a judgment call. Checklist:<ul><li>Are the reasons provided enough to drive to the arguer’s conclusion?</li><li>Is the premise based on insufficient evidence or faulty causal analysis? Some premises provide evidence that is based on too small a sample or unrepresentative data.</li><li>Is some key or crucial evidence missing that must be provided in order to accept the argument?</li></ul>

Sufficiency

A premise should be acceptable to a mature, rational adult.The claim should meet the following standards:<ul><li>It is a matter of undisputed common knowledge.</li><li>It's confirmed by one’s own personal experience or observation.</li><li>It's an uncontroverted claim from a relevant authority.</li><li>It's a relatively minor claim that seems to be a reasonable assumption.</li></ul>

Acceptability

It does not use reasons that contradict each other, contradict the conclusion or explicitly or implicitly assumes the truth of the conclusion. Checklist:<ul><li>Does the communication include at least one reason to support the conclusion as being true? If not, it is not an argument, but an opinion.</li><li>Could any of the key premises be interpreted as making the same claim as the conclusion? If so, then it’s a “circular argument” without independent reason given to support the conclusion.</li><li>Do any of the premises contradict another premise, or does the conclusion contradict any of the premises?</li></ul>

Structure of a well-formed argument

A good argument includes an effective rebuttal to all anticipated serious criticisms of the argument. Arguers often use arguments that misrepresent the criticism, bring up trivial objections as a side issue, or resort to humor or ridicule are using devices that clearly fail to make effective responses. Checklist:<ul><li>Does the provided argument address the strongest counterarguments effectively?</li><li>Does the arguer anticipate and address serious weaknesses in the argument?</li><li>Does the argument show why alternative positions are flawed?</li></ul>

Rebuttal

<ul><li>Structure: Explicitly call out your conclusion and the supporting reasons.</li><li>Relevance: Ensure that all materials you’re presenting as part of your argument are relevant. </li><li>Acceptability: Soften any absolute claims to make them more acceptable. (e.g. “most politicians” instead of “all politicians”) </li><li>Sufficiency: Put yourself in your audience’s place, and see if the reasons are sufficient to accept your conclusion.</li><li>Rebuttal: Declare upfront what the weakest parts of your argument are and proactively address them.</li></ul>

Making your own argument stronger

A premise is relevant if it provides some bearing on the truth of the conclusion. Checklist:
<ul>
<li>If the premise were true, does it make you more likely to believe that the conclusion is true? If yes, the premise is probably relevant.</li>
<li>Even if the premise were true, should it be a consideration for accepting the truth of the conclusion? If no, then the premise is probably not relevant.</li>
</ul>

The relevance of a premise

At its core, an argument consists of a conclusion and one or more premises, or claims.
<ul>
<li>The conclusion is what the communicator wants his or her audience to accept.</li>
<li>The premises are the reasons for believing the conclusion to be true.</li>
</ul>

Constructing a good argument

In our daily lives, we're constantly hearing or making persuasive arguments. We may be listening to a colleague's argument for why we should support one of her initiatives. We may hear an argument for why we should buy a certain product. Or we may need to make our own argument to get approval for one of our projects.