Welcome to Bridge Building: Using Intermediate Conclusions

In Thinking Skills, constructing a strong argument is like building a bridge. You can’t just leap from your starting point (your evidence) to the other side (your final conclusion) in one giant jump. You need support pillars in the middle to keep the structure steady. These "middle pillars" are called Intermediate Conclusions.

In this chapter, we will learn how to use these stepping stones to make your arguments more persuasive and well-structured. This is a vital skill for Paper 2, Question 5, where you are asked to construct your own argument.

What exactly is an Intermediate Conclusion (IC)?

An Intermediate Conclusion (IC) is a claim that acts as both a "finish line" and a "starting block" at the same time. Here is how it works:

1. It is supported by at least one reason.
2. It then serves as a reason to support the Main Conclusion (MC).

The Basic Flow:
\(Reason \rightarrow Intermediate \ Conclusion \rightarrow Main \ Conclusion\)

Analogy: Imagine you are trying to convince your parents to let you go on a trip.
Reason: I have finished all my chores and my homework.
Intermediate Conclusion: Therefore, I have proven I am responsible and have free time.
Main Conclusion: So, you should let me go on the trip this weekend.

Notice how the middle sentence "finishes" the thought about chores, but "starts" the argument for the trip!

Quick Tip: The "Therefore" Test

If you aren't sure if a statement is an IC, try placing "therefore" before it and see if it is supported by the sentences before it. Then, see if it helps explain the final point you are trying to make.

Structuring Reasoning with Multiple Strands

In the Cambridge 9694 syllabus, you are encouraged to develop strands of reasoning. This means you have different lines of thought all pointing toward the same goal. Intermediate conclusions are the best way to "tie up" each strand.

A Multi-Strand Example:

Strand 1: (Health focus)
Reason: Fast food is high in salt and saturated fats.
Intermediate Conclusion 1: Therefore, regular consumption of fast food leads to long-term health problems.

Strand 2: (Financial focus)
Reason: Cooking at home costs a fraction of the price of a takeaway meal.
Intermediate Conclusion 2: Thus, preparing your own food is a much more economical choice.

The Main Conclusion (MC):
MC: People should be encouraged to cook at home rather than eat fast food.

By using \(IC_1\) and \(IC_2\), you have built a much more sophisticated argument than if you had just listed a bunch of random facts.

Step-by-Step: How to Construct Your Argument

When you are sitting in your exam and need to write a short argument (Question 5), follow these steps to ensure your structure is perfect:

Step 1: Identify your Main Conclusion. Know exactly what you are trying to prove before you start writing.

Step 2: Group your ideas into themes. If you have four reasons, see if two of them relate to "money" and two relate to "safety."

Step 3: Create your Intermediate Conclusions. Write a sentence that summarizes the point of each theme. Use "conclusion indicators" like:

  • Consequently...
  • As a result...
  • This suggests that...
  • It follows that...

Step 4: Connect them to the Main Conclusion. Use a final "lead-in" word like "Therefore," or "In conclusion," to present your final claim.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

Don't worry if this feels a bit technical at first! Many students make these common mistakes when starting out:

1. The "List" Trap: Simply listing five reasons without any ICs. This makes your argument feel "flat." Remember: \(Reason + Reason = IC\).

2. The "Hidden" IC: Sometimes students think an IC is just a reason. To make it clear to the examiner, use indicator words like "So" or "Hence" to show you are drawing a mini-conclusion.

3. Forgetting the Main Conclusion: Don't get so caught up in your intermediate steps that you forget to state your final point clearly!

Quick Review: The Structure Checklist

Before you move on to strengthening your argument (which we cover in a later chapter), check your current structure against these points:

  • Do I have at least two separate "strands" of reasoning?
  • Does each strand end in an Intermediate Conclusion?
  • Do all my Intermediate Conclusions support the Main Conclusion?
  • Have I used clear indicator words (like "therefore" or "because") to show the logical flow?

Key Takeaway

An Intermediate Conclusion acts as a bridge. It takes the "raw material" of your reasons and processes it into a "sub-point" that makes your final conclusion unavoidable. Mastering this structure is the difference between a simple opinion and a high-level piece of Critical Thinking.