Newman Chapter One: Ways of Understanding and Expressing Propositions

One of the many marvelous uses of AIs like ChatGPT is in rewriting archaic texts for a more modern and perhaps less educated audience. Here's an example of some 19th century British prose (from Newman's Grammar of Assent) rewritten by ChatGPT for modern high schoolers:

1. Different Ways to Hold and Express a Proposition

A proposition is a kind of statement that joins a subject with a predicate (basically, something said about the subject) using what’s called a copula—usually the verb “is” or some other form of “to be.” Propositions can take three main forms: interrogative (questions), conditional, or categorical (straightforward statements of fact).

1. Interrogative propositions are questions. For example, “Does free trade help the poor?” This kind of proposition suggests that there’s a real possibility that the answer could go either way—it could be yes or no. It’s open-ended and invites an answer.
2. Conditional propositions express conclusions based on other ideas. For instance, “Free trade helps the poor because it increases job opportunities.” These statements depend on reasoning that came before them.
3. Categorical propositions are assertions, which means they state something as a plain fact, without conditions or reference to any other idea. For example, “Free trade helps the poor.” An assertion stands alone as a complete and final claim.

Even though these three types of propositions are different, they often follow one another in a natural order. A person might begin with a question, then arrive at a conclusion, and finally state that conclusion as an assertion.

However, even though they’re related, each of these has its own identity. A question is clearly not a conclusion, and a conclusion is not yet a full assertion. A question is about exploring possibilities. A conclusion is the result of reasoning—it's a judgment that still shows its ties to the arguments behind it. An assertion, on the other hand, is when that conclusion is finally put forward as a stand-alone truth.

In short:

• A question opens the door.
• A conclusion steps through it.
• An assertion says, “I’ve arrived.”

The differences between these are important, and we shouldn’t confuse them—even if they often lead into each other.

Assertion vs. Conclusion: Standing on Its Own

When we assert something, we’re not arguing or trying to prove it—we’re just stating it as true. An assertion, by definition, stands apart from a conclusion, just like a command (which tells someone to do something) is different from a persuasion (which tries to convince someone). Both commands and assertions act like stand-alone declarations. They don’t depend on other ideas or reasons, even if some reasoning may have come before them. For example, we might say that certain facts were needed before we could confidently make an assertion—but once we make the assertion, it doesn’t need to show those facts. It stands by itself. This makes commands and assertions feel more personal—they come across as definite acts done by a person, not just ideas floating in a chain of logic.

Now, when the author says that questions, conclusions, and assertions are "intrinsically distinct" (meaning that they’re different by their very nature), he’s not saying that they can’t show up together in a discussion. In fact, we might ask a question, then come to a conclusion, and then state that conclusion as an assertion—all about the same topic. For example, we might first ask, “Is free trade helpful?” Then we reason through the facts and conclude, “Yes, it generally is.” Finally, we might tell someone, “Free trade is helpful,” as an assertion.

And even after we’ve concluded something, we can still turn it back into a question if we want to reconsider it. Or we might restate the same conclusion to someone else. We might even give an assertion to one person, a conclusion to another, and ask a question about it to a third. But—and this is key—at any one moment, when we’re making an assertion, we’re not also making a conclusion, and we’re not asking a question. Each act has its own role. So when we assert something, we’re no longer in the act of concluding; and when we assert or conclude, we’re no longer questioning.

2. How We Mentally Hold Propositions

Just like we can express a proposition out loud in different ways—as a question, a conclusion, or an assertion—we can also hold those same propositions internally, in our minds. In fact, for each external way of saying something, there’s a matching mental act. These three mental acts are called Doubt, Inference, and Assent.

Here’s how they connect:

• A question matches the mental act of doubt. When we ask a question, we’re really showing that we’re uncertain—we don’t yet believe or disbelieve the proposition. For example, if I ask, “Is free trade good?” I’m not committing to an answer. I’m unsure, and that’s doubt.
• A conclusion lines up with the act of inference. To infer something means you’ve looked at reasons or evidence and come to a judgment. If I decide that “Free trade should help poor countries,” that’s me drawing a conclusion based on some reasoning.
• An assertion expresses assent, which is when you mentally accept something as true. If I say, “Free trade is definitely good,” then I’m not just concluding it anymore—I believe it firmly. That’s assent.

To put it another way:

• To doubt is to say, “I don’t know yet.”
• To infer is to say, “Based on what I know, this follows.”
• To assent is to say, “Yes, I accept this as true.”

For instance:

• If someone doubts free trade, they’re not sure if it’s good or bad.
• If they infer, they believe free trade might or must be good based on some evidence.
• If they assent, they fully accept that free trade is good.