Scientific Presentation Method

Logical structure of a scientific presentation

Scientific presentations require certain principles and procedures. Typically, scientific presentations have a logical structure that includes the following components: 1) Presentation problem; 2) Scientific arguments; 3) Arguments (scientific and practical); and, 4) Evidence (methodology ) of the presentation.

1. Presentation problem

Every time preparing a presentation, the researcher does not stop at stating the topic but also has to ask questions, and must answer the question for himself: "What argument will be presented to the audience, or to the chosen presentation format?". The question posed for each presentation like that, is understood as the presentation problem. Stating the presentation problem, that is, asking questions like that, will help the presentation have rich content and can generate many good ideas for the presentation.

Thus, before presenting, the researcher must know how to present the problem - that is, raise questions for himself, not just stop at stating the topic .

In fact, the two concepts “ Subject ”: “Causes of naughty children” and “ Problem ”: “Who is responsible for naughty children?” are often confused. The difference here is that the subject is presented in the form of a missing sentence, while the problem must be presented in the form of a question.

2. Presentation thesis

Normally, each presentation must have at least one thesis of the author. In other words, each presentation must answer at least one question: "What does the author intend to prove?". A spoiled child is the father's fault, not the mother's.

The point here is that each “argument” must be presented clearly, not in general terms. Furthermore, each argument must present an aspect of scientific thinking, and must state the main connection.

3. Argument of presentation

The argument of a presentation is the argument used to prove the thesis of the presentation. The argument answers the question: “Proof by what?”

A presentation is rich with arguments. A presentation lacking in arguments is a poor presentation, and a presentation that merely repeats the same arguments over and over again is a boring presentation.

However, for each audience, the presenter must present different arguments. Therefore, when preparing to defend a thesis before a panel or present to a specific audience, the presenter must prepare many arguments from different perspectives.

4. Argument (Method) presentation

According to formal logic, argumentation is the way, method, and operation used to link arguments with the thesis, or link arguments together. Here, argumentation can be understood as a set of methods, operations, and techniques that are interactive and complementary to each other, used by researchers to present and prove scientific hypotheses or theses.

How to apply arguments in scientific presentations appropriately to the interlocutor is a matter of both technical and artistic nature. In practice, some reasoning methods such as deduction, induction and analogy are often used in scientific presentations.

4.1. Deduction is reasoning from the general to the particular . In the deductive method, the presenter goes from theory to practice. The interlocutor/listener in a scientific presentation is an intellectual who often likes to listen to deductive arguments.

4.2. Induction is a reasoning method that goes from the specific to the general . In the inductive method, the speaker goes from actual events to generalize into theory. For groups with low education level, the inductive reasoning method is more effective.

4.3. Analogy is reasoning from specific to specific . In the analogy method, the presenter starts from simple stories that seem unrelated to the presentation topic to explain very abstract theoretical arguments. For difficult topics, the presenter should prioritize using the analogy method.

Analogous reasoning starts from the real similarity of those two objects, to draw a conclusion.

Example 1:

Premise: Earth is a planet with an atmosphere and water . And: Mars is also a planet and has an atmosphere. Conclusion: So Mars also has (or could have) water.

Example 2:

Premise: Sugarcane has a mechanism to store sugar.

and: Radishes have a sugar storage mechanism.

Conclusion: Plants also (may) have a mechanism for storing sugar.

Logical validity conditions for deductive reasoning

Deductive reasoning has a certain logical value when all the following conditions are met:

a/ Knowing for sure that the similarity between two objects must be essential, have similar or equivalent elements.

In example 1: Earth and Mars are both planets.

In example 2: Sugarcane and radish are both plants.

b/ There is a necessary connection between the property assigned to the second object, and the common nature stated between the two objects. In example 1, the common nature assigned to the two objects is the atmosphere.

In the concluding proposition: the first property assigned to the second object (Mars) is: having water, then the connection with the property "having an atmosphere" would be a valuable suggestion.

Analogous reasoning is precarious, but it is valuable because it helps to generate new hypotheses.

How to apply presentation methods that are appropriate to the audience, both technical and artistic. For example, even for the intellectual group, who prefers deductive reasoning , the presenter should prioritize deductive reasoning. But when the intellectual audience is tired, the presenter should also switch to inductive reasoning. When the intellectuals start to doze off, they should switch to analogical reasoning, by cleverly finding amusing arguments to "wake up" the intellectuals.

The logical structure of a scientific presentation is a strict process. However, the components of the logical structure of a scientific presentation as mentioned above (problem, thesis, evidence and proof) do not always have to be presented/expressed, but depend on the purpose and on each specific presentation form. Below is a summary table of cases that must be presented according to the logical structure of a scientific presentation.

Mark ( x ) - required to present

Marker ( [x] ) - may not be necessary to present

" No " - no need to present

Dr. Vu Truong Son

Graduate Training Institute – Dai Nam University