Past Concept - Further Discussion

3). Pick one concept in the class that we have covered so far in the class that you think needs further discussion.  Please do some additional web research on that particular topic and discuss what you have found.  Include weblinks in your blog post so the class can see what you have researched, and so the class can gain greater understanding of that particular topic.  (Note:  You might want to go back and read through your blog to see what you found difficult to understand from simply reading the book.  This will help you understand that topic a little more thoroughly, and help others in the class understand a bit more too - it's called community learning).  :)  



Argument Test
Looking at my past blog for this concept and after learning more, I thought this would be a good foundation concept to go back on for more discussion.  So, knowing that a good argument we need 3 components: . "The premises are plausible, 2. The premises are more plausible than the conclusion, 3. The argument is valid or strong" (p. 42, Epstein).  On my older post about this concept (Sept. 11), I actually had a claim using "always" which makes the argument week because I made it a generalized claim.  Before, I looked at is as a "sure thing" thinking it would make the claim even more 100%, but instead, it actually did not help the argument.


Now, adding on to an argument, there is also inductive and deductive arguments.  Inducting is when the argument is based on experience or observation and is deductive if the argument is based on a rule, law, or principle.  Breaking down a deductive argument, there are two kinds which are a syllogism or a conditional.  For a syllogism, it is a compile of claims that lead up to the argument.  For a condition, we have learned about this which is us saying "If (this happens, Then (this happens)".


website:[http://www.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/deduc/deduc.html]

Assignment #2

2). Since we are almost finished with assignment #2, please discuss the usefulness of the first or second major course assignment. Use specific examples.

Working on assignment #2, we were able to learn about an existing organization and applying what we have been learning in class.  It helps us analyze the types of claims and arguments people use.  We learn how to see and apply where we can find fallacies, reasonings, claims, emotion to appeal, and legitimacy of advertising.  It was useful to work as a group and discuss everything to have a better idea on the different components we have been learning.  It helps further our learning especially since we are discussion and interacting with one another to answer any questions or concerns we may have.  Instead of just seeing examples through the book and having the analysis from the book, we get to see our own examples and create or own analysis to test what we have learned.  My group has been a great group asking questions and communicating with one another.

Chapter 8

1).Please discuss, in detail, what you learned from reading Chapter 8.  Discuss at least 2 things you learned. 
Please explain the concepts and give a personal example or personal story for each.

Chapter 8 in all about making claims through quantities: from none to all, some and most, and all in between.  With quantities, people tend to generalize claims that can make the claim weak.  We can say "All the girls wear boots", but saying all, meaning every single girl in the world, wears boots, but in reality, there are probably a good number of girls that do not wear boots.  This then will not be a strong or valid claim.  We can also generalize by saying "Girls who have trendy hairstyles get it done at professional salons by hairstylists.  Nancy has a trendy hairstyle.  So, Nancy gets her hair done by a professional hairstylist"; however, this can be a weak claim as well.  We fail to leave room for other possibilities that Nancy can be doing her hair herself or know someone who does not work at a professional hair salon, but is really good with hair.  Generalizing claims can leave room for a stronger counter-argument because its almost like stereotyping-- its not 100% true.  There is always another outcome or possibility.

New Concept: Antecedent & Consequent

3). 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.

Affirming the Consequent

If (A) happened, then (B), so (A).  We must always consider the various factors of the consequent happening.  We cannot be narrow minded and only address one possibility.  For example: If I go to the gym, then I will be drained for the day.  So since I am now tired, I went to the gym.  Here, we are denying the possibility that I could have done something else that took away my energy like going to work or running errands all day.

Denying the Antecedent

If A happened, then (B).  So, if (A) did not happen, then (B) did not happen.  Once again, we are overlooking possibilities and other factors to causes of situations.  For example:  If I go to the gym, then I will be drained for the day. / I am not drained today, so I did not go to the gym.  There is the possibility that I did not work hard enough at the gym to drain my energy or even the case that I drank an energy drink or even maybe going to the gym gave my energy.  There are many things we need to consider and not entirely overlook.

Chp. 7: Directly & Indirectly Refuting an Argument

2). Please discuss, in detail, what you learned from reading Chapter 7.  Discuss at least 2 things you learned. 

In refuting arguments, our main purpose is to show that an premise/argument is weak.  Through refuting arguments, we can also test our premise/argument's strength by questioning if we can come up with a counter-argument.  By addressing counter-arguments will strengthen our premises and arguments.

Directly Refuting

Ways of refuting an argument are: "(To) show that at least one of the premises is dubious.  (To) show that the argument isn't valid or strong.  (To) show that the conclusion is false." (Epstein, p. 149).

Basically, we are finding the obvious details of the argument that are weak or false and counter-arguing it.  If we doubt an argument being made, we then try to show whether its invalid, weak, or false.  Simple and to the point.

Indirectly Refuting

Sometimes, it is not as obvious to see that the argument being made is invalid, weak, or false; however, in the contrary, we still may be able to see that there is something invalid, weak, or false with the argument, but not exactly sure what.  What can be happening is that there is absurdity in the claim.  Then here, we must reduce absurdity by "show[ing] that at lease one of the several claims is false or dubious, or collectively that are unacceptable, by drawing a false or unwanted conclusion from them" (Epstein, p. 150).  In other words, we must show where in the premises are doubtful and unacceptable to its purpose.  Sometimes, people are not arguing clearly and we must point out what makes its unacceptable as a clear argument.

Chapter 6: Conditional Claim & Contradictory

1).Please discuss, in detail, what you learned from reading Chapter 6.  Discuss at least 2 things you learned. 

Conditional Claim

In general, we know a condition is something that has a requirement in order for something to happen or exist.  It is the same way for claim.  A conditional claim can be determined by a "If A, then B" statement; however, you treat the entire statement as one claim, not as two separate claims.  "A" + "B" = one claim and both must have equal truth value.

Example:

If I go out tonight, then I would probably not have time to do my homework.

Contradictory of Conditional Claim

In contrast to the Condition claim, the Contradictory Conditional Claim a "If A but not B" statement.  In a conditional claim, we are saying that when one thing happens (A), then this will happen (B) ; however in the contradictory, we are saying if one thing happens (A), then this will not happen (B).

Example:

Even if I go out tonight, I would still probably have time to do my homework.

New Concept: Relevance

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

Relevance

In any good argument, we have learned many factors like knowing about the subject to argument well, to make reasonable legitimate arguments, and more.  In addition to maintaining a good and valid argument, we must remember to stay relevant.  We can make good claims, but for a different kind of conclusion.  We have to think about what we are trying to prove.  If we are trying to argue that fruits are good for your health and then make premises like "most fruits taste sweet and fresh" or "you can make delicious smoothies with fruits" it is not relevant to the argument you are trying to make.  You are then being irrelevant and it would not support you conclusion that "fruits are good for your health"  If you take away those arguments, it would not make the argument any weaker because its a premises for a different conclusion.  Instead we can come up with premises like "most fruits contain certain vitamins that are good for your body" or "eating fruits will (good health condition outcome here)".  Such claims relate to fruit and the health benefits it has.

Advertising on the Internet

2). Concerning Section C in Chapter 5, Advertising on the Internet. Please find a piece of advertising on the internet, provide a link on your blog, a screenshot, or include the advertisement in your post so the class can see what you are discussing. You should then relate the piece of advertising back to the concepts in Sections A & B in chapter 5 and discuss.

In this advertisement I found on the yahoo main page, is stating a Vegas 3-Night and Roundtrip for $136.  We do not have to not have to believe this advertisement, but that does not mean that it is false.  We also may think there is a lack of evidence, but that does not make the evidence given is false.  From my own personal experience and conclusion of beliefs I have to conclude about this advertisement is that this advertisement is not completely bogus.  Instead, I believe when it comes to advertisements, there is more to the advertisement we are not thinking about.  For example, when it says 3-nights in vegas and the nice pictures to compliment the ad, we naturally think a really nice hotel on the weekend, but instead it can be the cheapest hotel with the cheapest room and it can be the cheapest nights to stay and fly out to vegas.  In addition, with most advertisements, when we sign up, we get even more advertisements either in the mail or in our e-mails and most of us hate those junk mails filling up our inboxes.  It sounds like a really good deal, but there tends to be something that else we are not taking into consideration about the ad.

Repairing Arguments

1). In our last discussion week we talked about Violating the Principle of Rational Discussion (page 202) and Content Fallacies (page 201). This week I would like you to discuss the idea of repairing arguments. For this question, please come up with an argument that needs to be repaired. Look over the examples on pages 63-67. Come up with your own example and 'discuss' it as they do in the text. To accomplish this, you should understand the Principle of Rational Discussion and the concept of Repairing Arguments.


Blake is a tattoo artist.  He has 7 years of experience.  Therefore, he is a well-experienced tattoo artist.
Assuming the claim of "He has 7 years of experience" is true, the person arguing knows about the subject under discussion, and is able and willing to reason well, we can add to this argument to make it a stronger argument.  This argument is missing (a) premise(s) to help glue everything together.  In this argument, we could add "Any tattoo artist with experience at least over 3-5 years is well-experienced".  Then this would make the argument stronger and remains valid to show that Blake is well over 3-5 years and has much experience in the tattooing field.  Adding this claim would help this argument because its still plausible and plausible to the person arguing and is more plausible than the conclusion.  Thus, repairing this argument to become stronger and remain valid.