Clarification

3). Pick one concept from throughout the semester that you feel can use further discussion.

I feel that the concept of casual reasoning should be further explained in our class discussion because this is one of the only concepts that I had to really do a lot of additional research on.  The website we were provided that was supposed to help us understand the concept had left me very confused at first, and so I went to other websites to fix this confusion. However, in the process I somehow got confused with some of the other websites as well, and this is evident in the blog I first posted on casual reasoning, as I accidently confused causal perceptions with casual reasoning. In other words, when I explained it to the class I gave a wrong example, as casual perceptions occurs when we make sense of why something occurs and casual reasoning means that everything has a cause and effect. When we know what the effects of certain causes are, we can either make things happen or prevent them from happening in our world from our reason. These are two very different things, and it wasn’t until reading other blogs did I realize that I made this error, and so I believe that this is a concept that should be better clarified.

Likes and Dislikes

2). What was your favorite thing about the class?  What was your least favorite thing about the class?  How can this class be improved?  Again, be specific.

My favorite thing about this class was never having to wake up early to physically go to the class, and that I could basically complete the assignments and tests on my own time. However, I did not like that there was a twelve hour gap between blog submissions because normally I wouldn’t be able to complete the assignments until the weekend, as other class filled up my time during the week. I would then end up finding myself waking up early, or submitting the assignments at random times on Fridays and Saturdays and feeling rushed, which is why I think that we shouldn’t have this 12 hour gap.  I also didn’t like that the days started on Sundays because I don’t want to start my workweek until Monday like my other classes. However, I do feel that if you keep the 12 hour gap, then you should start the workweek on Monday, so that we have all weekend to complete our assignments such as on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, without feeling rushed. I also didn’t like that once we’ve taken the test, we don’t get it back, so I don’t know what I’ve gotten wrong and what I need to improve on for the next test. Maybe by giving us the tests in an email with the answers, we may begin to learn where were making our mistakes and errors.

What I've Learned

1). What have you learned in this class over the course of the semester?  Be specific.

When I first signed up for critical thinking, I was really nervous because I had no idea what a class about critical thinking would be about. When I first thought of critical thinking, what came to mind were questions from math textbooks that said, “thinking critically,” which are always the questions I can never get right. However, I was happy to discover that this critical thinking class would be about analyzing arguments and statements in ways I had never thought of before. This may sound silly, but before taking this class I didn’t even know what a premise was, and now I find myself using the word all the time when I’m evaluating claims (there’s a premise and a conclusion). I also now know how to identify when an argument is weak, or valid or invalid, which is also something I didn’t fully know how to do before taking this class. This class also taught me how to tell when arguments needed repairing and what makes for a good argument such as that the premises are plausible, the premises are more plausible than the conclusion, and the argument is valid or strong.  I also learned what type of strategies to look out for in the real world that people tend to use to convince you of their argument, such as all the appeals to emotions.  Finally, this class has taught me how to work in small groups effectively by the small group communication book. Loved my group!!

Thanks for Reading! 

Tracing the Cause Backwards

3). Pick one concept from the assigned reading (chapter 15), that we have not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.

In the Epstein book, I found tracing the cause backwards to be the most interesting concept because it helped me understand that a line has to be drawn in tracing the cause.

Example: The soccer ball hit my nose, and now it is bleeding. The cause is the soccer ball hitting my nose and the effect is that my nose is bleeding.

We could come up with more causes such as that the girl on the other team headed the soccer ball at my face and now it is bleeding. So really it was the girl who headed the ball at my face that caused my nose to bleed. Or we could say that it was the girl who kicked the ball to the girl who headed the ball, which caused it to hit my nose and make it bleeds’, fault.  

We could go on and on with the possibilities, so having the just one cause makes the process of identifying the cause so much easier. “We stop because as we trace the cause back further it becomes too hard to fill in the normal conditions” (Epstein).

Mission Critical Website

2). What was useful about the Mission Critical website?

The mission Critical Website was helpful because it listed many of the concepts that we have previously learned in the Epstein book, and provided me with more definitions and examples to understand those concepts.  Sometimes just reading the Epstein book isn’t enough to learn the concepts, and so this site is helpful in that it gives other ways of phrasing those definitions to make them easier to understand.  This site was also helpful for me in learning the different concepts, particularly causal arguments because they give us exercises to do. These exercises are extremely helpful because unlike the book, when you select the wrong answers, it will tell you why. Being able to know why your answer is incorrect helps you to not make that same mistake in the future. This to me is the best feature of this website, and I will definitely use it when I’m studying for the tests in this class to make sure I understand the concepts to the best of my ability. 

Cause and Effect

1). What was useful about the Cause and Effect website reading and exercises?

I found that the Cause and Effect website reading and exercises were very helpful in understanding the material in Chapter 15.  When I first read Chapter 15, I was kind of overwhelmed by all the examples and sections that we had to read, but once I read the site and did some of the exercises on the website, I had a lot of “ohhh” moments, when I started understanding the material better, and it really helped clear up some of the questions I had. I especially liked the link on post hoc reasoning! In the book it says that there are two mistakes in evaluating cause and effect: reversing cause and effect and looking too hard for a cause. Post hoc reasoning falls under looking too hard for a cause, and the definition was, after this, therefore because of this. I found the kind of confusing but once I read the website, I understood it so much better! Post hoc reasoning means that just because A precedes B, that doesn’t mean that A caused B. In other words, we have to look at all the possibilities before we can identify if A really cause B. Lastly, the website and exercises really helped me understand that in casual arguments, there is only one significant difference or significant commodity. What this means is that there is only one cause to the effect. We could go back and find other causes and differences, but that would be too difficult. So we try to find in the casual argument, if there is a strong likelihood of the causation, by identifying one significant commodity or difference. :)

Analogies in the Law

3). Pick one concept or idea from the assigned reading, that we have not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting, and discuss it.

For my topic of choice, I chose to select Analogies in the law.  When I first started reading this section I was nervous that I wasn’t going to understand it or want to understand it because anything involving laws and government isn’t something that necessarily interests me.  However, I felt with that reason in mind, I should really try to make myself pay attention. By doing so, I was able to discover that Analogies in the law are analyzed arguments “with important similarities pointed out and a general principle stated” (Epstein).  What this means is that in the courtroom, judges will use analogies to solve a case.  They take existing laws, and will find their similarities and differences in order to call for justice in the courtroom. Sometimes by doing so, they will be able to make new laws or overthrow old ones.

For example:

Sometimes there are courtroom cases that by law should be enacted. Let’s say that dancing in the streets has been against the law after 11 pm for ten years now because dancing leads to unwanted pregnancies for teenagers. A girl has been brought to the judge because she was caught dancing after eleven.  The judge has seen that in the past only one or two teenage girls have gotten pregnant in that town, but he doesn’t believe it was ever a result from dancing after hours. He then tries to look at past cases and “tweak” the general principles in that law, by drawing on the similarities and differences to make new ones, “but doesn’t include the one’s he is deciding” (Epstein).  By doing so, he can make new general principles in the law, or in this case, overthrow an old one.

Confusion Gone

2). Sometimes when something is difficult to understand, it becomes a bit clearer when we try to explain it to someone else.  Which type of reasoning was most difficult to understand?  Please do some additional Internet research on that specific type of reasoning and discuss what you learned.

The type of reasoning that was the most difficult for me to understand at first, out of all the other types of reasoning, was casual reasoning. I had trouble with it at first because the first link that we were provided left me kind of confused. I understood what it meant when it said, casual reasoning occurs when we have good reason to believe something when there is a cause and effect that are related, but I didn’t get what it meant when it said, “…it may become possible for us to alter our environment by producing (or by preventing) the occurrence of certain kinds of events. This statement went right over my head when I was trying to understand the concept, so I further researched what causal reasoning was. I soon learned by reading other sites, that this final statement meant that everything has a cause and effect. When we know what the effects of certain causes are, we can either make things happen or prevent them from happening in our world from our reason.

For example:

·      I forgot to put my shirt in the closet and now it is wrinkled.

By not putting my shirt away in the closet, I caused my shirt to become wrinkled, which is the effect. I could prevent this from occurring in the future by casual reasoning, or I could make it happen again, even though I know the effect of the cause. 

Reasoning

1). Read through the different types of reasoning posted to the instructors blog.  Give an example of each type of reasoning outlined on the instructor’s blog.  The example should be something the folks in class can relate to, so try to use real world examples.

1.    Reasoning by Analogy:  We reason by analogy, when we make a statement that compares the relationship between two or more similar things. Normally when we make the comparison, we assume that because A is like B, they must be similar; however, that is not always the case, and so it is usually helpful to provide evidence when determining whether or not these things are actually similar or different when reasoning by an analogy.

For example: Is a Milky Way more like a 3 Musketeers Bar or a Snickers Bar?

                     Milky Way         vs.           Musketeer’s Bar   vs.    Snickers Bar

Candy                            Yes                                    Yes                                   Yes

Chocolate                     Yes                                    Yes                                   Yes

Fluffy Texture               Yes                                    Yes                                  No

  
Crunchy                          No                                    No                                    Yes

Peanuts                           No                                    No                                    Yes


Carmel                            Yes                                    No                                    Yes

         ____________________________________________________________

In the table above, I made a comparison of three similar candy bars with the hopes of reasoning by analogy.  I compared three very similar candy bars, of which many may already know the difference, to discover which candy bar is the most similar to a Milky Way. In my findings, Milky Ways were most similar to a three Musketeers bar because they had 5 similar things in common compared to a Snickers bar, in which they only had 3 similar things in common. In result, a Milky Way is most similar to Musketeers than a Snickers bar.

2.    Sign Reasoning: Sign reasoning can occur anytime we assume something has occurred because we’ve seen it happen before or it’s common knowledge (like we know that that after the sun rises it will set). Sign reasoning also can occur when we believe that something must be true because we’ve seen it with our own eyes. It’s kind of like cause and effect reasoning. For example:  If I am wearing earnings from Tiffany. & Co. A very expensive jewelry store with a Juicy Couture Jacket, people may assume that since I am wearing these items, I must be rich, since celebrities have worn these types brands. They are reasoning based off their knowledge from seeing other rich people wearing these items.  However, I might not actually be rich because these items may have been gifts from friends or relatives.

3.    Casual Reasoning: Causal reasoning can occur when we try to make sense of certain events that have happened.  We consciously try to find the cause of the effect of an event.

For Example: A lot of times when I am sleeping in my bed at home, I hear noises in the middle of the night, like my dorm being hit open. It scares at first, but then I think of reasons for the cause of the noise, such as that it might have been my cat that hit my bedroom door open, and that was what caused the effect of the loud noise from my door.

4.    Reasoning by Criteria:  Occurs when we come up with a list of criteria that will later be judged to determine a final decision.

For example: The criteria for applying as an exec officer position for the senior class are: grade in school, grade point average, and experience in government a class. Many students will apply for the position, but the one that fits all the criteria will become the exec officer, and the final decision will be made.

5.    Reasoning by Example: This occurs when we use examples in our arguments to persuade others. This type of reasoning can be very effective since examples are based off of real life scenarios.

For Example: I usually get straight A’s, but I took a philosophy class from Dr. Philosopher, and failed miserably. I suggest you don’t take his class.

6.    Inductive:  Inductive reasoning can occur when we make generalizations on things based on our past experiences and observation. However, in this type of reasoning, just because the premises may be true, that doesn’t mean that the conclusion will be too, there is just a possible chance that the conclusion is true.

For example:

·      My mom has gotten up at 6 in the morning every day as long as I can remember. (Premise: true)

·      Tomorrow, she will wake up at 6am. (Conclusion: there is a possible that this is true, but the premise doesn’t guarantee its truth-value).

7.    Deductive:  Deductive reasoning occurs when there is no possible way from the premise to be true and the conclusion false at the same time.

Example:

·      All students at SJSU have to take 60 units before they can take upper division courses. (Premise)

·      I am a student at SJSU. (Premise)

·      So I will have to take 60 units before I can take upper division courses. (Conclusion)

Appeal to Vanity

3). Pick one concept from the assigned reading this week, not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.

In chapter 10, I learned a lot about the different types of appeals to emotion; however, I found that the one that interested me the most was the appeal to vanity.  The appeal to vanity occurs when we try to convince people to believe or do something because we’ve made them feel good about themselves. This normally occurs when we try to sway the person to believe our argument because we’ve given them some sort of compliment. I think that this appeal to emotion stood out to me the most because when I was in high school I would use the appeal to vanity on numerous occasions when I wanted to hangout with my boyfriend on school nights. I knew that my mom wasn’t really kin on the idea of letting me hangout with my boyfriend on school nights, but I would come up with an argument to flatter her into letting me invite him over.

For example: I would start out my argument by saying that I was doing very well in all my classes and I finished all my homework for that night. Afterwards I would listen to my mom talk and compliment her on her accomplishments for the day or maybe the outfit that she was wearing. Meanwhile, I had the thought in the back of my mind that if she liked what I was telling her, she’d cut me a break and let me hangout with my boyfriend. It worked every time. I was appealing to vanity by setting up the argument that I was a good student and because I was doing well in school, I should be allowed to hangout with my boyfriend. By adding compliments into the mix, I made her feel good about herself, which put her in a happier mood and ultimately swayed her into letting me hangout with my boyfriend on a school night.  I still use this type of appeal to vanity with her today, and she never suspects it haha. 

Appeal to Fear

2). Pertaining to page 195, complete objective 1, 2, 3, 6 OR 7.

3. Find an advertisement that uses an appeal to fear. Is it a good argument?

The advertisement above promotes the anti-smoking campaign that smoking kills. Most people are afraid of death, and so by placing the individual’s hand in the shape of a gun, while holding a cigarette with a shadow of a gun in the background, an appeal to emotion is created: the appeal to fear. The appeal to fear is a tool that both advertisers and politicians use to manipulate people into believing that they should do or believe something based on fear. The unstated conclusion in this case based on fear would be that, smoking cigarettes is like killing yourself with a gun. In addition to the statistic that is presented in the advertisement, the overall image creates a sense of fear to those who are thinking of smoking or who are smokers. I believe that this is a good argument because it is not “substituting one legitimate concern for all others, concluding our minds to alternatives” (Epstein).  This advertisement is promoting that smoking is deadly and can be like holding a gun in your hand and provides the added statistic that about 106, 00 people in the UK die each year due to smoking making this advertisement not just based on fear, but on reality. If this advertisement just simply had the picture of the individual and the gun, then it would have been “concluding our minds to alternatives.” However, since it didn’t, this advertisement, which is based on appeal to fear, gives us good reason to believe why smoking is something that should be feared and is something we shouldn’t do.

Appeal to Emotion

1). Discuss the idea of Appeal to Emotion. There are different aspects of Appeal to Emotion, which type of Appeal to Emotion strikes you, and why?

Premises in an argument that suggest that, “you should believe or do something because you feel a certain way” (Epstein) are called appeals to emotions and we should never fully accept an argument based on these appeals to emotions, until we have put further thought into whether they are good or bad.

 There are four different types of appeals to emotions that appear in arguments:

·      Appeal to pity: an argument to convince, by making an individual feel sorry or pity towards something.

·      Appeal to fear: an argument to convince, by tapping into an individual’s fear.

·      Appeal to spite: an argument to convince, by the hopes of revenge (two wrongs make a right) or by convincing that “you should do or believe something because you owe the person a favor.”

·      Appeal to vanity: an argument to convince, by making you feel good about yourself. You should do or believe this, because it makes you feel good.

These four types of appeals to emotions are all ones with prescriptive conclusions, which can either be good or bad. When we have prescriptive conclusions we can better identify whether or not new premises should be added to the argument, and they help us to see whether the argument is good or bad.

Appeals to emotions, which are never good are ones that have descriptive conclusions. Descriptive conclusions try to convince based off things such as wishful thinking.

In addition, the appeal to emotion that stood out to me was appealing to pity because I see this tactic used all the time in television commercials.  They show polar bears stranded on floating ice blocks in the middle of the sea, animals who are strays and pitiful, and children in third world countries that need our help.  This type of appeal to emotion makes one want to pick up the phone, even if we can’t afford it, to help these animals and people. In some cases, these commercials even say, “you are the one that will make this difference” “you are the one that will change their lives forever.” This however, isn’t necessarily true as there are other organizations and people that can make a difference and help these people and animals; they are just appealing to pity to convince you that the only way to help the cause is if you, individually, help them.  This of course isn’t the case, and we need to understand that we can’t help every organization because it appeals to pity, we can make a difference in this world in other ways as well.

Vague Generalities

3). Pick one concept from the assigned reading this week, not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.

In Chapter 8, I found that the concept on vague generalities to be a very useful concept to learn and understand to make strong arguments.  It is normal for us in every day life to give claims using the words, all, almost all, many, most, a lot of, some, a few, and very few to talk about a collection of things without being specific on how many things are in that particular collection. For example, “many girls are upset.” This claim isn’t stating specifically how many girls are upset in a collection of girls by using the word many. However, sometimes these words that we use such as many, are too vague to be considered strong arguments. How do we know if many girls are upset? How much is many? We don’t know, so it’s too vague to be a good argument. There are however, two vague generalities that aren’t too vague and can be used to make a strong argument: Almost all and Very Few.  It makes sense to believe the conclusion based on the premise that:

Almost all cats have claws

I have a cat

So my cat has claws.

Almost all is more specific and makes the claim more plausible, so we have good reason to believe the conclusion. This claim also falls under the rules of direct way of reasoning with almost all, which are usually strong arguments.

Almost all S are P, a is S, So a is P.

If I had used the words a lot instead of almost all, it would not have made sense to believe the conclusion based on the premise that:

A lot of cats have claws

I have a cat

So my cat has claws.

This claim is too vague: A lot doesn’t give us a good enough reason to believe the conclusion is true based on the premise. How many is a lot?

Reasoning in a chain with almost all, doesn’t always make a good strong argument either because it could lead to true premises and false conclusions.

Furthermore, after reading this section on vague generalities, I have learned how to make stronger arguments by using the words, almost all and very few, as their premises give us good reason to believe their conclusion and when not to use them, such as certain times when reasoning in a chain. 

First Major Course Assignment

2). Discuss the usefulness of the first or second major course assignment. Use specific examples.

The first assignment, Critical Thinking in News and Politics, was a useful assignment because it allowed me to apply concepts from the Epstein book to a real life argument, as well as the concepts that came from the Group Communication book.  From reading the Group Communication book, it was easy for my group to begin the project as we learned previously to the assignment, that it was important to be open to everyone’s opinion towards the argument, to listen and to consider everyone’s comments, and to keep in contact in order to complete the assignment efficiently. These concepts on group communication would lead us to complete the assignment on time. In addition to having the skills on group communication down, this assignment proved to be useful to us another way, as it allowed us to really peer into a real life argument and apply the concepts we learned in the Epstein book on things such as premises, effectiveness of an argument, and strong/valid arguments. The section that proved the most useful to me, and probably my group members as well, was the part where we had to identify if was a strong/valid argument based on Chapter 5.  I feel that if we hadn’t have been asked to identify whether it was strong/valid based on Chapter 5, I wouldn’t have learned those concepts as well as I have.  We really had to learn them so that we could correctly identify our argument as strong/valid to receive the desired grade of an A.  Overall, this assignment proved useful to me as I now have had a group communication experience, and have learned how to identify and apply Epstein’s concepts to real life arguments. 

Chapter 8

1) Discuss one concept in Chapter 8 that you found useful.  Please explain the concept and give a personal example or personal story.

In the beginning of Chapter 8, there is a discussion on general claims using the words, “All” and “Some.” According to Epstein, all is used to describe a claim that means “every single one, no exceptions and some is used to describe a claim that means “at least one, but not all.” Out of the two, I found that the meaning behind the word some to be the most interesting to me because I’ve seen it being used in numerous situations. For example, a month or so ago my sorority was planning on going out to a toga party. Instead of listing those who weren’t going out and making them feel down, the president said, “some of you may not want to go to toga night. For those of you who aren’t, we can have a movie night at the house tonight as well.” By using some, she didn’t have to target out the one girl who didn’t feel comfortable with going out. At least one girl, but not all the girls in the sorority would not want to go out, and so she used some purposely to be more vague and not make the one girl or girls feel bad. This is a useful tactic to use in other situations as well, when people don't want to place a target on someone who doesn't want others to know they are feeling uncomfortable in other situations. Furthermore, if she were to have said, “all of you may not want to go to toga night, that would have implied that every single one of the sorority girls did not want to go out, no exceptions.  

Thanks for reading :)

False Dilemma's

Pick one concept from either text, not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it. Use either Chapter 6 or Chapter 7.

False Dilemmas 

Chapter 6 explains another way in which we can identify when a compound claim is a bad argument. It is called a false dilemma.  False dilemmas occur when you exclude possibilities from your argument, which makes your “or” claim false or dubious. The reason why false dilemmas make a bad argument is because they leave out certain possibilities that will ultimately lead you to a false conclusion.

For example: Your mother tells you off and says that either you eat your vegetables everyday or you’ll be unhealthy for the rest of your life.

This is an example of a false dilemma because your mother is giving you an either or claim by saying either you do this or that will happen to you. She is leaving out all the other possibilities of ways in which you can live a healthy life so that her child will think that they have to eat their vegetables everyday or else they will be unhealthy for the rest of their lives. This claim is certainly not true as her child could eat fruits and exercise to live a healthy life. Vegetables are good for you but not eating them will not make you unhealthy. Ultimately, the reasoning behind this mother’s claim is to make her child eat his/her vegetables. However, the claim is dubious, has a false conclusion, and she leaves out other possibilities, which makes this claim a false dilemma and a bad argument.

Chapter 7

In Chapter 7, I learned that it is important to Raise Objections when you want to make a stronger argument. There are also direct and indirect ways to refute an argument to prove that an argument is dubious in some way or is a false argument. In addition to refuting arguments, there are four bad ways of attempting to refute an argument such as phony refutations, slippery slopes, ridicule, and strawman.  Finally, with understanding these different concepts, we can learn to reflect on our claims within the arguments that we create, which will ultimately benefit us in the future, as we will start to make better arguments, identify ones that are bad, and know when to refute other people’s arguments.

Raising Objections:

When you raise objections to the claim you have created, you will be able to reflect on the claim you’ve made to see whether it is weak, or if the unstated premises you’ve created are dubious.

Here’s an example of Raising an Objection:

Me: I want a new pair of black high heels.

Friend: You already have five pairs. (objection)

Me: But I love shoes.  (answer)

Friend: You could spend your money on something better that you don’t already have. (objection)

            You could buy a DVD player. (Objection)

            You could buy a Netflix account. (Objection)

            You don’t really need new shoes. (Objection)

Me: I don’t like buying things that I can’t wear. (answer)

Me: I always need shoes. (answer)

Me: So I will buy a new pair of black high heels. (answer)

By imagining that my friend is objecting my claims, I can see that my argument for wanting new shoes isn’t very strong and that I would need to add more support to back my reasoning for my claims to become stronger. Maybe I could add in that I love shoes and the ones that I have are worn out, therefore I need to buy new ones. Maybe I could add in that I got a bonus this week and I love spending my extra bonus. Since I only like buying what I can wear, then I will spend my extra bonus on a new pair of black high heels. I could add other claims as well to make this stronger as well, but this is just a simple example of showing how you can reflect on claims and question your reasoning to make an argument stronger by raising objections. I also want to add that I learned that raising objections is an important concept to know, because after reading this section I’ve realized that it can be very beneficial towards creating good arguments.

My last concept I will talk about is refuting directly, which occurs when:

·      You show that at least on the claims in the argument in question is subject to doubt.

·      You show that the claim isn’t valid or strong: it is weak.

·      You show that the conclusion isn’t true.

When you are directly refuting, you are taking an argument and dissecting its claims to show that the argument at hand is unrepairable. You are showing the person who made the claim (it could be yourself) that the argument is false or dubious. 

Ultimately, once, you have shown by the rules indicated above that the argument isn’t good, you can honestly refute someone’s argument.

Thank you for reading my post!! I hope you all have a clearer understanding of these concepts! :)

Chapter 6

In chapter 6, I learned other ways of how to identify or make an argument good or bad based on the different types of compound claims: “or” claims and conditionals.

This whole chapter was about looking at claims and seeing if we can reason with them based on their truth-values. It is important to understand the rules of both compound “or” claims and conditionals as we use them in everyday life and understanding their concepts will help us make stronger arguments in the future.

Today I will be talking about the contradictory of a compound claim and conditionals and their contradictories, which were two concepts presented in chapter 6.

1) Firstly, compound claims are two claims seen as one that can be connected by words such as or, and, or but. The two parts of the claim that are stated within the one claim have to be related to each other in order to have any type of truth-value.

For example: Either I won’t eat breakfast before class or I will eat breakfast before class.

These are two claims within one and have truth-value.

Determining the Contradictory of a claim: “The contradictory of a claim is one that has the opposite truth-value in all possible circumstances.”

This same rule applies to a Contradictory of an or claim and the contradictory of an and claim. When understanding contradictory of these compound claims, it is useful to identify each claim by using A, B, C, or D.

For example: The Contradictory of an or claim states that:

Claim A or Claim B’s contradictory is not claim A and not claim B.

 Or an easier way to put it is: A or B = not A and not B

So…

Claim:            (a) I will eat breakfast before class or (b) I won’t eat lunch at school.

Contradictory:  (not a) I won’t eat breakfast before class and (not b) I will eat lunch at school.

This is contradictory because it has the opposite truth-value than the initial claim. As you can see, sentence A said, will then won't. Sentence B said, won't then will.

The Contradictory of an and claim is: A and B = not A or not B.

In addition: These two contradictory concepts will help us to state claims as being false. The concept of using A, B, C, or D to identify claims will also help in future scenarios of reasoning with the other claims.

2) Conditionals and their contradictories: Conditional claims are similar to compound claims by the fact that they are considered one claim made up of two. However, they are different than compound claims because they are not connected by words such as or, and, or but, but rather they can be connected by the words: if, then.

For example: a) If don’t watch t.v right now, b) then I will get my homework done.

It is important to remember that in conditional claims, the sentence that follows if, is referred to as the antecedent and the sentence that follows then, is the consequent regardless of the order claims in the statement.

In the example above, claim A would be identified as the antecedent since it follows if and B would be the consequent since it follows then.

The Contradictory of a Conditional: “If A, then B has contradictory A but not B.”

In simpler English this would be: If A, then B = A but not B.

For example:

Claim: If I didn’t finish my homework, then I will fail my class for sure. (if A, then B)

Contradictory: I didn’t finish my homework but I won’t fail my class. (A but not B)

One final rule: “The contradictory of a conditional is not another conditional”

For example: I am a good student, even if I failed my test.

                        I am a good student, although I just failed my test.

I hope that I showed you all my understanding of the difference between compound claims and conditional claims and their contradictories. Compound claims use: or, and, but. Conditional: if, then. Understanding these types of claims will benefit to understanding whether or not an argument is good or bad. Whether its false, weak, valid, etc.

Accepting and Rejecting Claims

In chapter 5, I found that the author’s discussion on accepting and rejecting claims based on appeals to authority to be the most interesting to me, as I do believe that many people fall into the trap of accepting claims without considering whether or not the claim was made by a true expert. According to Section B of Chapter 5, “We can accept a claim made by a reputable authority whom we can trust as an expert on [a] claim and who has no motive to mislead.” However, we cannot just accept a claim based on the mere fact that they are an authority figure because that would be a bad appeal to authority.

An example of accepting the claim by an authority we can trust:

We can accept a doctor’s claim about the type of prescription his patient needs to recover from his/her cold because he is an expert in this field and his motives are to help the patient. Therefore, in this clinic setting, we have no reason to reject the claim, as we can trust his expert opinion and that his motives are not to mislead.

An example of rejecting a claim by an authority:

We can’t always accept a claim just because the person is an authority figure, as this would be a bad appeal to authority.

For example: A doctor could claim that blow drying and straightening your hair leads to split ends. Although the doctor’s motive may not necessarily be to mislead, we cannot accept this claim just because he/she says so. The doctor is an expert authority, but he is not an expert on hair-care.  Therefore, we cannot accept this claim because in doing so, would be a bad appeal to authority.

In addition to these examples, there are also advertisements today that are geared to mislead their audiences into accepting their claims. Ultimately, it is up to us to use our reason to either accept or reject the claims by first considering the background of who is stating the claim and their motives behind it.

Advertising on the Internet

http://www.luckybrand.com/on/demandware.store/Sites-LBJ-Site/default/Default-Start?cm_mmc=Google-_-Search %3E Brand-_-General%3EGeneral%3EBroad-Broad-_-lucky&gclid=CKSBrODGxqsCFcwbQgodbm073w

For my Internet advertisement, I chose to discuss the ad for the popular brand of jeans called, Lucky Brand. According to this advertisement, Lucky Brand is America’s favorite and finest pair of jeans. We should all buy a pair today.

It can also noted that this advertisement definitely did not imply the conclusion of the ads promotion, as it tells us, “buy a pair,” “do it today,” which is different then other companies who often have unstated conclusions.

From my own personal experience, I can say that my two pairs of Lucky Brand jeans are my favorite, since they both look and feel like a fine quality pair. However, even though I categorize Lucky Brand jeans as my own personal favorite, I can easily reject this advertisement’s claim. The reason that I can reject this claim is because of my other experiences and observations that I have made in life. I know that not everyone believes that Lucky Brand jeans are America’s favorite and finest; if they were, wouldn’t everyone in American own a pair? They certainly don’t. People are wearing all different kinds of jeans that they believe offer them the most comfort and quality. In addition, Lucky Brand also may not be America’s favorite pair of jeans to purchase because they aren’t always cheap. America does not like expensive. So ultimately, we can reject the advertisements claim that we should buy America’s favorite and finest Lucky Brand blue jeans since its premises appear to be false based on my personal experience.

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)