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.