Repairing Arguments

Example of an argument:

My dance teacher was a professional ballet dancer.  She has been involved in the world of ballet for over 50 years. Therefore, I would trust her advice on what type of point shoes I should purchase for my ballet class.

When evaluating this argument, we must first decide whether or not we can reason with the argument presented. By the Principle of Rational Discussion we can assume that the dance teacher knows “about the subject under discussion” as the first and second premises show that she must be an expert on ballet related issues. We must also assume that the argument is intended to reason well and that the person who is presenting the argument isn’t lying about the facts presented. If we can do that, then we can repair the argument by either adding on or deleting plausible premises to make the argument stronger. After further evaluating this argument, we can find that we can repair the argument to make it stronger. We make an argument stronger and more plausible for the readers by either adding or deleting a premise or conclusion, but we only do this when we believe that it will make the argument better. “We only repair when it is needed.” In this case, we could add the premise, “Anyone who has had 50 years of ballet experience could give you expert advice on all questions concerning ballet.” This is a premise that is “plausible and would seem plausible” to the person reading the argument and would therefore make the argument stronger. Overall, this argument has become stronger with the added on premise as it gives the reader a valid reason to trust that my dance teacher would give good advice on ballet related issues such as what type of point shoe to purchase.

Negotiating Effectively

Negotiating Effectively

According the Group Communication Book, the act of negotiating can occur between two businesses or more as well as within a single organization and the most common form of negotiation is compromise.

Negotiations within an organization can include:

Negotiating working hours. (If I work the night shifts this weekend, could I have next weekend off)

Negotiating vacation time. (If I give up some of my sick days, could have more vacation time?)

Trading off responsibilities. (If you get the boss coffee today, I’ll do your paperwork)

Most often than not, comprising while negotiating is the goal that most people want to achieve. However, you cannot always expect a compromise to take place because what you negotiate has to be appropriate. What this means is you have to be realistic in your comprise. For example, if you fully believe that you deserve a raise, then try to negotiate with your boss till you reach a compromise. That is an appropriate situation. In an inappropriate situation would be one in which you are asking more for less.  For example: I want a raise even though I never show up to work to work on time. This is an unrealistic goal and could even sway your boss to fire you.

Another alternative to compromising is brainstorming.  The process of brainstorming involves formulating alternate ideas that would appeal to both you and your boss. For example: You could say to your boss, “I didn’t take any sick days last year and I was wondering if I could use some of those days for vacation time this year.” You could include in your compromise that you are ahead on your charts and have been working overtime as well. If the boss says, “you can have an extra two days this year of work off,” it’s best to close the deal or suggest a new negotiation.  It is never a good idea to test your boss so “suggesting alternate solutions is often an effective negotiation strategy” (O’Hair/O’ Weimann)

The 5 Key Strategies for Negotiating

1)   Always listen to the person you are negotiating with. In order to present them an effective argument you must know their argument and reasons as well.

2)   Understand the other person’s feelings and belief.

3)   Ask questions about the other person’s argument. Who, What, When, Where, Why.

4)   Be opened minded. If you come into the negotiating without settling for less than what you are asking, you are likely to not reach a compromise.

5)   Be calm and rational. Do not lose your temper.

Content Fallacies

Explain the Fallacy in your own words. Give a real world example that you heard in the past.

Content Fallacy

In the Epstein book, we discover that there are “many arguments that are bad because they use or require for repair a false or dubious premise” (Epstein 201) and when we have some reason to believe that there is an error in an argument we refer to the argument as a fallacy.

There are many different examples of Content Fallacies in our Epstein Book; however, I chose to reflect on the “bad appeal to common belief fallacy.”

The bad appeal to common belief fallacy is a fallacy that affects humans both young and old.  People fall victim to the bad appeal of common belief all the time when the chose to believe or do what is considered the popular thing in society.

For example, women in America were not always considered equal to men.  It was the common belief that a women’s role in society was in the home and nowhere else. At the time, almost all men believed that women should be homemakers and because almost all of them shared this similar belief, they didn’t doubt themselves that they could be wrong. In other words, because a majority of them believed that a women’s place was in the home then they assumed that this popular belief must be true. However, this was a bad appeal to common belief because as we observe today, women can benefit society in more ways than one.

Another example of the bad appeal to common belief fallacy is when teenagers fall into the trap of believing that drinking is a good thing at parities because it loosens them up and makes them more sociable. They believe that because everyone is doing it, then it must be a good thing for them to do too. However, this is a bad appeal to common belief because drinking isn’t the best thing to do at a young age.  Just because you’re friends are doing it doesn’t mean that it’s a good thing.  You’re brain is still developing and you could damage cells in your frontal lobe.  Drinking could also lead to health problems or addiction in the future so even if it’s the popular thing to do, that doesn’t mean you should do it too.

Complex Arguments

For each exercise below, analyze the structure by answering the following:

Argument? Yes.

My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the cars in his yard. 1 People do not like living next door to such a mess. 2 He never drives any of them. 3 They all look old and beat up 4 and leak all over the place. 5 It is bad for the neighborhood, 6 and it will decrease property value. 7

Conclusion: My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the cars in his yard.

Additional Premises needed?

My neighbor has a lot of old and beat up cars in his yard. a

They leak all over the place. 5.

There are many children that play in that neighborhood. b

They could be exposed to the leaking chemicals. c

Certain chemicals are bad for their health. d

Any bad chemical exposed to children is a threat to their health and should be taken away. e

My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the old cars in his yard 1 because they leak certain chemicals and any chemical that is bad for a child’s health should be confiscated. f

Identify any subargument:

C and D support statement E. 5, C, D, and E yield F. You can delete sentence 6 and 7. Sentence 2 isn’t particularly necessary either, so you don’t need to include that.

Good Argument?

After reconstructing the argument, I believe that it has become an invalid strong argument. The conclusion is plausible to the premises because any chemical that isn’t good for a child’s health should be confiscated in their presence.  All of the premises link to support the conclusion making it a good argument.

Afterward

I found this assignment to be somewhat of a challenge personally. After doing the assignment, I feel that I have a better understanding of how to make an argument stronger. You really have to make sure all your premises will link and support your final conclusion in order for the argument to be good and make sense! I feel like I could now more easily identify whether an argument is good or not after doing this assignment so it was definitely useful for me.

TIme Pressure

Dealing With Time Pressure in Groups

In college it seems like time is always an issue, which is why I’ve decided to talk about avoiding time pressures. Chapter three in the Essential Guide to Group Communications Book talks about how time pressures can affect the outcome a group decision in two ways: planning and leadership styles.

Planning to Avoid Time Pressures

We’ve all learned in college that it takes good planning and coordinating to produce things such as A worthy essays in our college courses. Our teachers give us a time limit to write the essay and it is up to us to plan when we will write the essay and how we’ll coordinate our ideas so that the essay will be good. Sometimes if we don’t plan out our time effectively we experience time pressure, which may cause us to write the essay but it’s not as good as it could have been (C worthy paper). This same idea applies to good decision-making in groups since the best decisions are made when we plan and coordinate our time and ideas to complete a task both efficiently and effectively together. 

For example: If a group A has 2 minutes to answer a complex math equation and group B has an unlimited amount of time, Group B will probably figure out the equation over Group A because they have more time to collaborate and solve the problem together.

Using Leadership Styles to Avoid Time Pressures

In my opinion, every group needs a leader in order for a task to become completed. There are four different types of leadership: Authoritarian – the leader makes the decision himself without help from group members. Consultative – the leader listens to others opinions and then makes the final decision himself. Participative – There is a leader, but the group makes the decision. Laissez Faire – there is no direct leadership. There are many different reasons why a leader might decide his leadership tactic when working in a group and sometimes “the style a group leader uses is dependent on time” (O’Hair/Weimann).

For example: If a leader chooses to use participative but finds himself in a situation in which there is no time for the group to make a decision, he’ll have to switch to authoritarian. However; if time is not an issue, I do believe that participative leadership is the best method in making group decisions in our groups.

Important to Remember:

There are 3 ways a group can avoid time pressures to make effective decisions:

1)   Taking polls in a group can save time. Ex. Everyone in this room who likes topic A raise your hand. Now everyone in this room who likes topic B raise their hand. The most hands wins and time has been saved when making the decision.

2)   Time Limits: Giving each member a time limit in your group. Ex. Group member 1: You have five minutes to pitch your ideas on Tuesday. Group member 2: You’ll have two minutes afterwards to give your opinion on his pitch.

3)   The group doesn’t have to decide: If the group is concerned that time pressure might affect their decision, don’t make one at all. Instead, “postpone reaching a conclusion.” (O’Hair/ Wiemann)

Strong Vs. Valid Arguments

Strong Vs. Valid Arguments:

The main difference between strong and valid arguments is this:

Strong arguments can have a false conclusion.

Valid arguments have to have a true conclusion.

Strong Arguments:

All strong are arguments are invalid because the premise can be true while the conclusion is false. In order for the argument to be considered strong; however, the possibility that the conclusion is false has to be slim to very unlikely.

The Giants play in San Francisco tomorrow.

I am their biggest fan and I have tickets to that game.

Luckily, I have no plans for tomorrow.

So, I am going to the Giants game tomorrow.

This is an example of strong argument because there is a possibility that even though I have tickets to the Giants game, I might not be going. (The premises may be true but the conclusion might be false). I might get sick or my mom doesn’t want me to go. Although those are possibilities, they are highly unlikely, which makes this a good strong argument, as we have no reason to believe that my argument isn’t true.

Valid Arguments:

An argument is considered valid when both the premise (or opening statement) is true and the conclusion is true at the same time. An easy way for me to determine whether a statement is either valid or invalid is by asking myself the following: Is there any possible way that the conclusion can be false based upon the premises? If I can’t think of any way the conclusion can be false then I classify the argument as being valid.

Example of a Good Valid Argument:

Mauna Kea and Mount Everest are the tallest mountains in the world.

Mauna Kea is taller than Mount Everest.

So Mauna Kea is the tallest mountain in the world.

In my geology class we were talking about what was considered the tallest mountain range in the world. This particular argument represents a valid argument because there is no way that the premise could be true and the conclusion false at the same time. This example also represents a good valid argument because the entire argument is true and we have no reason to doubt that it isn’t true.

Thanks for reading :))

The Good Argument Test

The 3 Tests for an Argument to be Good

1)   The premises are plausible.

2)   The premises are more plausible than the conclusion

3)   The argument is valid or strong

Example 1 in determining whether or not an argument is good:

Everyone who works at Pixar is an animator.

My sister works at Pixar.

So my sister is an animator.

Is this example valid or strong? This example represents a valid argument because there is no possible way for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false at the same time. However, this represents a bad argument because the premise: “everyone who works at Pixar is an animator” and the conclusion: “my sister is an animator are false.  Even though the second premise is true, we have no reason to believe that all workers at Pixar are animators. In this example, the premise is also not more plausible than the conclusion, which further makes it a bad argument.

Example 2:

Pixar Animation studios made Toy Story.

So the character, Buzz Lightyear, was created by Pixar.

Is this example valid or strong? This example represents an invalid argument because it is possible for the premise to be true and conclusion to be false at the same time.  Someone else could have created the character that didn’t work at Pixar. Maybe they bought the idea from another company? Maybe they saw a picture someone had drawn of buzz at an art fair? However, although these are possibilities, they are highly unlikely, which makes this a strong argument.  The premise is also plausible as we have good reason to believe that Pixar had created Buzz Lightyear.

Thanks for reading :)) 

Discussion Question #3

Pick one concept from the reading (either Epstein or the Small Group Comm book) and discuss in detail.

The Essential Guide to Group Communication: Overcoming Communication Apprehension in Groups

In the Group Communication book I found the section on “Overcoming Communication Apprehension in Groups” to be very interesting because I have found myself in situations where I had felt so nervous and fearful about speaking up and sharing my ideas with others when I’ve been in a group setting. Communication Apprehension brings about feelings of anxiety and it has caused me in the past to have an increased heart rate and it actually makes my hands shake with nerves as well. It’s not uncommon to feel this way, “Estimates suggest that about 20 percent of the population is highly apprehensive about communicating,” which is comforting to know. However, even though its nice knowing that other people have experienced high feelings of nerves and anxiety while in groups, its important to learn how to overcome those feelings because when you can’t share your ideas and thoughts in your group, you do not only miss out on the discussion but you miss out on the opportunities for you to present your own ideas that could have benefited the discussion. Here are a couple ways to calm the nerves: 1) take a deep breath and let out all the nerves as you breathe out. It’s like a little yoga breathing exercise before you talk : P 2) Think positively: Just like you when you were younger and your athletic coach told you to perform a new trick they would say, NEVER say you CAN’T. Apply that concept to the group discussion. You CAN speak in front of the group, your ideas CAN be as beneficial to you as they are to the group. 3) Prepare: Get your ideas organized before the day you meet up in your group. Just like when you are preparing a speech for your public speaking class. Know the material and you’ll feel confident in sharing your ideas. These exercises could help you and I to become better communicators in a group setting and hopefully by the end of the semester, to become better critical thinkers as well. :)

Discussion Question #2

2) Use and example from everyday life: Describe a vague sentence or ambiguous sentence that you have heard recently. Where did you hear this sentence? An Advertisement? Was it a conversation with a friend? What qualified the sentence as vague or ambiguous?

VAGUE...

After reading the section on vague sentences, I began to really listen in on the conversations around me.  Let me tell you, I don’t know about you, but after doing that I could point out so many sentences that were vague! One that sticks out the most to me was the one that I had heard at the dinner table last night.  My sister had asked my dad when they were going to go car shopping for a newer and more reliable car.  She has been waiting a long time to get a new car because her yellow Volkswagen bug has been stalling, which isn’t good for bay area traffic! When she asked him, his response was typical of any dad who doesn’t want to think about spending any more money; he said, “we’ll get around to it eventually.” Now to me that response was very vague and it was frustrating to her because what is eventually? Does eventually mean this weekend? Does it mean this week? Or sometime this month? This was a sentence that could be understood in many different ways, which is why it is a vague sentence. In order to know for sure what he meant by “eventually,”she had to ask him specifically what day and what week he meant.

Thanks for reading :)