Week 3 Post 3: Something Interesting

One interesting topic that I went over from this week’s topic is from Essential Guide for Group Communication Chapter 4. It talks about how when your arguments that compromising is something that you need in order for things to work out in everything especially with negotiating with people. Other than negotiating, there are different ways to share ideas in a way where its fair for everyone and it’s not all about yourself.  An example of how compromising works is when my friends and I would talk about how we were going to decorate our apartment.  We both had different ideas of how we wanted the room to look like. But in the end we talked it out and compromised in having a mix of the two. We would decorate our bed and desk the way we wanted then the walls and other decorations would be a mixture of our designs. By agreeing with each other, we skipped all the fighting and arguments. In the end we both loved the room and how it turned out.

Week 3 Post 2: Content Fallacies

Fallacies are different ways of showing how an argument is a bad and hard to support.  As for the fallacy that I chose to talk about is Phony Refutation. This is when a person says or does something, but in the end, they are doing the opposite of it. This type of fallacy is always happening in the world. It is funny how parents sometimes use this technique to teach their kids. An example of this is when I heard my Nutrition teacher talk about how she’s teaching her daughter to eat her fruits and vegetables. On the inside she hates bananas. She doesn’t like the texture, smell and taste of it, but she has to deal with it so her daughter will learn that its an important fruit to eat. For her to teach her daughter to like something that she hates is a bad argument. Especially once her daughter gets older and learns that her mom hates bananas. I see that her intensions are good, but in the end its still a Phony Refutation. 

Week 3 Post 1: Exercise #2 pg.225

Exercise on page 225 in the text, “Critical Thinking”:

2. I’m on my to school. I left five minutes late. Traffic is Heavy. Therefore, I’ll be late for class. So I might as well stop and get breakfast.

Argument- Yes she is arguing with her self because if she wasn’t late she would of not have second thoughts of getting breakfast, but since she’s late she has more choices.

Conclusion- Since she is already late might as well satisfy her hunger.

Additional premises need? - The person did not mention any reasons why she’s late or if anything got into her way to keep her from being on time.

Identify any sub-argument - The person thought it would be okay to be late because she’s already late anyways.

Good argument? - I don’t believe this is a good argument because the person did not mention any valid reasons to be late or why he/she is late. It just made it seems like he/she didn’t care

Week 2 Post 3: Definitions

A concept that I found interesting is understanding the meaning of a definition. People get misunderstood when words are not used in the appropriate way. From the text, “Critical Thinking” I have learned how to make a definition useful and correctly. A good definition consists of having the words define the meaning of by clearly stating the word that is being defined. An example of this would be a dumbbell. There are two meanings to this. The first definition from the Webster dictionary means, “a gymnastic apparatus consisting of two wooden or metal balls connected by a short bar serving as a handle, used as a weight for exercising.” The second meaning that Webster dictionary gave me was “a stupid person.” As you can see with one word there are two meanings to it. And one is understandable meaning but the other one is a definition that would cause arguments if you called someone that. Its funny how this word “dumbbell” comes as a good example of how a single can have several definitions, a good one and a bad one. So it’s important when using a word that we make it clear to the other person what we are trying to say.

Week 2 Post 2: Valid Vs. Strong Arguments

What is a valid argument and what is a strong argument? It may sound the same but if you get into a deeper meaning of those words it has different a definition to it. Let’s start with a valid argument; in the text “Critical Thinking”, Epstein states that, “Valid argument is a valid if there is no possible way for premises to be true and its conclusion false (at the same time)”. So in other words, a valid argument is an argument where the problem or issue is false and the conclusion is true as well.  An example of it would be: “Every employee at Safeway has gotten their pay check. Erick is an employee at Safeway. So Erick has been given his tuition.” This is a valid argument because it is not possible for one to be true and the other false. It is based upon the premises being true and the conclusion being wrong. It’s a valid argument but a bad argument.

A strong argument has a true conclusion that goes with the premises being true as well. An example of a strong argument would be when my cousin sat on a long car ride to Los Angles. She said, ”Every time I sit in long car rides I get sick. I ate a good breakfast and was not sick prior to this trip. I must get motion sickness when I ride in car rides.” This is a strong argument because it brings in a significant amount of support and proof that this premises is true and linking the conclusion to be true too.

Week 2 Post 1: The Tests for an Argument

How do we know if an argument is good or not? According to the text “Critical Reading”, it shows us how to determine if an argument is good. It is based off the premises, which is the problem and the plausible, how realistic is the issue. He lists out three rules to follow. You must show that 1.) “The premises are plausible”, 2.) “The premises are more plausible than the conclusion”, and 3.) “If the argument is valid or strong” (Epstein, 42).  We need to evaluate the argument before determining is the argument is a good one. In my own opinion, I feel that you need to also have common sense when you are trying to develop an argument with someone. You can’t just say something is true when its just not valid is real life. An example would be “The sun is blue colored.” Everyone knows that that is just not real. We need a common knowledge and can’t just make up a story and claim it is correct. 

Example:

Ryan has been the lead singer in church for 10 years. Ryan has a karaoke machine at home. Therefore, Ryan must love to sing.

This argument may be true, but the conclusion may be wrong. It gives a lot of details that can define him as a good singer such as the karaoke machine or because he has been singing for such a long time. We must go through each rule to see if this is a good argument or not. 1.) The premises are plausible. True 2.) The premises are more plausible than the conclusion. False, because he might have been forced by his parents to sing at church when he was a little kid and just stuck with it because he had to. As for the karaoke machine, it might have been his parents’ machine. All these things allow us to change how was see Ryan. 3.) This is a valid or strong. True. This is a valid argument, but a bad argument because it did not pass all three rules to be considered as a good argument. 

Week 1 Post 3: Descriptive and Prescriptive Claims

Descriptive claims are vague statements. In other words, descriptive claims can also be explained as a statement of observation with no judgment of right or wrong. An example of a descriptive claim is, “Eating vegetables will keep you healthy.” This is a descriptive claim because it is a fact.

Prescriptive claims are when you are stating the obvious. In other words, prescriptive claims are when you say something “should be”. For an example, “You should eat vegetables if you want to be healthy.” This is prescriptive because we used the word “should”, which indicates the statement is a suggestion from another person.

Prescriptive claims are more often in everyday conversations because we suggest what they should do in a commanding voice. Whereas, descriptive claims are used less often because they are more of a fact. It’s more common in advertisements than in everyday conversations. Usually we use prescriptive claims without noticing because it’s in more of a demanding tone. We notice when we are using a descriptive claim because people are trying to persuade you into doing something without a commanding voice.

Week 1 Post 2: Vague Sentences

A vague sentence is like a description or a response that doesn’t have enough details to answer a question. A vague sentence is also known as an unclear sentence. Usually vague sentences cannot create a vivid picture, giving the reader no imagery of what they are trying to say.

An example of a vague sentence is when my friend told me she moved into her an apartment with her roommate and I asked, “ How did you decorate your new room?” She answered, “It’s pretty, I just added a lot of stuff on the walls.” This is a great way of showing a vague sentence because she didn’t give a good image on what her room looks like. I asked how she decorated her new room and she replied with an unclear sentence giving me a vivid picture. This causes a vague sentence because she described her room with “stuff” instead of details that create imagery. This happens in a casual conversation because when we respond to a simple question, we don’t think about the details thoroughly. Therefore, we end up giving a vague answer.