Question #3

One concept from throughout the semester that can use further discussion are fallacies. I learned that many arguments are bad because they require or use for repair false or dubious premise. I also learned that the argument is a fallacy only if the premise is dubious and no other premises support the conclusion. During one of the tests on fallacies, the examples were very confusing when you had to decide if it was “drawing the line”, “false dilemma”, “slippery slope”, or “bad appeal to authority”. There were a lot of other terms as well, but it became very confusing and hard to understand. On top of the fallacies, violating the principle of rational discussion was also a bit difficult to understand. There are slanters, ridicule, strawman and other terms you had to take into consideration as well. Overall, this information was just very overwhelming and I thought could use more explanation and help.

Question #2

1)   Critical thinking is extremely important because it is evaluating whether we should be convinced that some claim is true or some argument is good, as well as formulating good arguments. My favorite thing about this class was being able to learn about all of the different types of material when it comes to critical thinking. There are many ways to prove a certain argument, but there are also many ways that an argument can fail. I enjoyed learning about anologies as well. Reasoning by analogy taught me to compare one side of the conclusion. My least favorite thing about the class were all of the tests. The homework was easy to complete and understand, but the tests were extremely hard and I did not always do too great on them. They had a lot of trick questions and the examples were difficult as well. Even though it was open note and open book, I feel that the tests could be a little easier in order to improve the class.

Question #1

1)   This course has been extremely helpful and has enhanced my critical thinking skills in many ways. The most important thing that I learned throughout this semester was how to dissect an argument and determine whether or not the argument is strong or valid. It is important to know whether or not the reader is convinced of the subject and what makes a claim. I learned that a claim is a declaritive sentence used in such a way that it is either true or false (but not both). Claims are very important because it is either someone trying to convince you, you trying to convince someone else, or you trying to convince your own self. I also learned about arguments and the different types of arguments as well. The conclusion should always follow the premise in order to have a strong or valid argument. I also learned about the criteria for accepting and rejecting claims as well from personal experience and other sources. Overall, I learned a lot of useful information that I can use in the future and in my everyday life!

Mission Critical Website

I found the Mission Critical Website extremely useful! I really enjoyed reading all of the different information on parts of an argument, basic relations, and the analysis of arguments. Each part provided great tools to utilize when it comes to arguments. It was also great review on inductive and deductive reasoning. The exercises helped me understand the topics more clearly as well. In the past, fallacies have been difficult to understand, but it was a great review on all of the different appeals. There are misdirected appeals and emotional appeals as well. In a misdirected appeal it is misapplied by being used to support an unrelated claim. But, an emotional appeal is never a legitimate strategy in an argument. I also liked learning about identifiers. Identifiers are the function played in an argument. They are usually word or phrases and can either be premise identifiers or conclusion identifiers. The purpose of an argument is always to communicate the idea clearly and precisely. All of the information I read and the exercises for critical thinking. 

Chapter 15

I learned that there is a certain criteria for cause and effect in Chapter 15. There are six major steps that one should follow. First you should always remember that the cause happened and that the effect happened as well. The cause will always precede the effects in arguments and it is nearly imporssible for the cause to happen the effect not to happen given the normal conditions. It is important to also remember that the cause does make a difference because if the cause had not been true then the effect would not have happened and been proven true. The last rule that I learned about steps for cause and effect is that there is no common cause. I also learned in Chapter 15 that there are two mistakes in evaluation cause and effect. Most people tend to reverse the cause and effect and they also look too hard for a cause which can end in a bad argument. I found Chapter 15 very effective and useful in my learning. 

Cause and Effect Website

The Cause and Effect website was very useful because it provided detailed examples on casual arguments. To strengthen a casual argument I learned that there are three main factors that I need to follow. I have to figure out 1) how acceptable or demonstrable the implied comparison is, 2) how likely the case for causation seems to be, and 3) how credible the “only significant difference” or “only significant commonality” claim is. These three factors helped me in the practice exercises because they used examples where I would have to decide how significant each answer was.  The exercises focused a lot on deciding what answer had the most significant “commonality” or the most significant “difference”. I also learned that there are two main rules to remember when you are dealing with causations. The cause must always precede the event in time and even a strong correlation is insufficient to prove causation. The Cause and Effect website was a very interesting read and I learned a lot of new valuable information from the exercises as well. 

Reasoning by Criteria

Reasoning by Criteria 

One starts by defining the criteria by which the outcome of a decision will be judged. Then one identifies the best decision and evaluates it as well. 

Different Types of Reasoning

Reasoning by Analogy:

Example: Is a peach more like an orange or a banana?

Sign Reasoning:

 When the school fire alarm is going off, everyone should exit the building.

Casual Reasoning:

Everyone in the car accident was injured in the car accident and had to go to the hospital. The car was traveling over 50 mph when it crashed, so everyone was hurt.

Reasoning by Example:

You should have your driver’s license if you are 20 years old. Since you do not have your license then you are going to have to rely on everyone else for rides.

Reasoning by Criteria:

I really like country music, so my mom bought me a concert ticket to Jason Aldean for my birthday.

Inductive: I have class at 8:30 am on Monday’s and wake up at 7:50 to get ready. So next Monday, I will wake up at 7:50 to get ready for my class that is at 8:30.

Deductive Reasoning:

Everyone who joins the Marines must take a drug test in order to pass. Tom is going to join the Marines, so he must take a drug test.

Judging Analogies

Judging Analogies-

We learned throughout chapter 12 about the different types of reasoning and reasoning by analogy. But, judging analogies is a useful topic as well. An anaology needs to be very clear and well stated, but if it is not then one should examine the similarities to find the general rule that will apply to both sides of the anaology. After you find the similarities, one should try and find the differences to see if the general principle might not apply to one side.

 Under judging analogies, there is a term called fallacy of composition.  The fallacy of composition is to argue that is what is true of one individual person is therefore true of a whole group. Or what is true of a group, is then true of an individual.

There are also seven main steps to evaluate an analogy.

First, one must ask is it an argument and what is the conclusion? Then one should ask what is the comparison? For the third step, one should ask what are the premises and is it both sides or only one side of the comparison? Then ask what are the similarities? For the fifth step, one should focus on if they can state the similarities as premises and find a general principle that covers the two sides? The sixth step is to question whether or not the general principle applies to both sides and if the differences matter. Lastly, one needs to figure out whether or not the argument is strong or valid.

Appeal to Spite

Objective Number 6.

Appeal to spite focuses on revenge and is also known as “wishful thinking”. In some cultures, it focuses on preserving one’s culture by defending honor and pride.

An example of appeal to spite is the following:

Ann- “Hey Jane, can you please take notes for me in class tomorrow because I cannot make it to class today?”

 Jane- “Yes of course, I’ll type them up and send them to you as well.”

Erica- “Jane, why would you say yes to Ann? You asked her to take notes for you last week and she rolled her eyes at you and said no.”

The premise was needed to make the argument strong because Erica was question Ann on why she would help someone that wouldn’t waste their time to help her.

People question whether or not two wrongs make a right for an appeal to spite and whether or not it is a good thing. Appeal to spite is usually looked upon as a bad morals. 

Prescriptive and Descriptive Conclusions

Prescriptive and Descriptive Conclusions:

When you label an argument as an appeal to emotion, then you are on the path to determine whether or not the argument is good or bad. The arguments try and persuade one of their emotions as well. There are two different arguments to decipher when you are looking at appeal to emotion, which is prescriptive and descriptive.

When one uses a prescriptive conclusion with appeal to emotion, the argument can be either be good or it can be bad. When one is alert to the use of emotion being presented in an argument, then one can analyze the premises more easily. The purpose of a prescriptive argument is to try and convince a person that they should do something.

A descriptive conclusion is bad if the appeal can’t be removed as a premise. It is also known as “wishful thinking” in an argument and we cannot be controlled by our emotions. 

Appeal to Emotion

Appeal to Emotion:

Appeal to Emotion focuses on the premises saying that you do something a certain way or have a certain belief because of the way you feel. Emotions play a significant role on our every day lives and have a lot of effect on the decisions we make.

An example of appeal to emotion is the following:

“Girl Scouts came to the door and I didn’t have any money, so I had to turn them away and they looked like they were about to cry. We should go down to the grocery store where they are selling cookies and buy some.”

This is an appeal to pity and it is implausible.

Another example of appeal to emotion is the term appeal to fear. Many politicians and advertisers persuade people for their campaigns. Appeal to spite focuses on revenge and people with bad or wrong morals use this type of appeal.

Appeal to spite strikes me the most because it refers to certain cultures and how people preserves "ones honor" and how they reject people who try and get even with one another. 

Between One and All

There were many interesting topics discussed throughout chapter 8. A topic discussed was “Between One and All”. There are precise generalities and vague generalities. There are a lot of similarities between one and all, which refers back to precise generalities. A vague generality focuses on different ways people talk about parts of collections without stating a certain number. There are also direct ways of reasoning with almost all and ways to argue backwards with almost all as well.

One can tell if an argument is valid if they have enough precision. An example of a vague generality is:

           

            Very few cats do not meow.

            Fluffy is a cat.

            So fluffy meows.

 This premise gives very good cause to believe the conclusion. You can also reasoning a chain with almost all. But, this argument is usually weak. All of this information focuses on what makes a general claim and is very useful for arguments. 

Chapter 8 Concept

One concept in Chapter 8 that I found useful was general claims and their contradictories. General claims declare things in a universal way about just a part of group or all of it. The contradictories of the general claims focus on words such as  “all”, “some”, and “no”. The word “all” is meant for everything or can relate to every single one.  The term “some” focuses on only at least one and “no” means not even one. A personal example from my life when I used contradictories of a general claim was when my best friend and I were growing up and we said, “no boys are allowed in our tree house”.  This also is interpreted as “nothing that is a boy is allowed in our tree house”. There are different ways of saying that nothing or no part of a collection suits some condition. There are different ways to determine whether or not information is valid and general claims and their contradictories determine this information. 

Valid and weak forms of arguments using conditionals

After reading Chapter 6, I found the information on valid and weak forms of arguments using conditionals useful and interesting. There are many arguments where it is impossible for the basis to be true and the conclusion to be false.

-If the train leaves at 2:15 and you show up at 2:25, the train will leave without you.

-The car crashed going over 70 mile per hour and now it is totaled.

Both of these examples are similar because they have valid premises and it proves that there is no way that the conclusion can be false.

Modus Ponens is another way of reasoning. For example:

If the train leaves at 2:15 and you arrive at 2:10, then the train will not leave without you.

-If you do not drive over the speed limit and pay attention to the road, you will not total your car.

These examples are valid and show another way of reasoning.

Using conditionals are very useful because it supports your argument and makes it stronger. There is no way to disprove your conclusion if you have a strong and valid premise.

Chapter 7 Discussion

Chapter 7 focuses on Raising Objections and Refuting an Argument. After reading this chapter I learned how to refute an argument directly and indirectly.

There are three main ways to refute an argument directly. One has to prove that at least one of the arguments are uncertain. Also, it is important to prove that the premises aren’t valid or strong. Lastly, one has to show that the conclusion is false.

When refuting an argument indirectly, you can’t always prove that the premises are uncertain or false. The conclusion may be argued, but the argument seems inconsistent and illogical. When I was reading about how to refute an argument indirectly, I also learned about the term “reducing to the absurd”. When one reduces to the absurd, one proves that at least one of the claims is not true and doubtful. Therefore, one is proving that the argument has an unwanted conclusion.

Chapter 6 Discussion

Chapter 6 focused primarily on Considering the Alternatives of claims and the Conditionals.  Two things that I learned from this chapter is information on the contradictory of a claim and the conditionals and their contradictories.

The contradictory of a claim focuses on the opposite of the truth that is stated. It is known as the negotiation of a claim.

In the book they gave the following example:

Contradictory of an or claim: A or B has contradictory not A and not B.

For example, a claim could be that Tim McGraw is a country singer. The contradictory of that claim would be, Tim McGraw is NOT a country singer. This proves the opposite truth-value of the circumstance.

A conditional claim can be rewritten as an “if” or “then” claim that must be truthful.

An example of a conditional claim is:

            I will go to college and get a degree and then I will become a doctor.

This claim does not contradict itself because there is no certainty about the claim because “then” was used and the claim still makes sense. 

Internet Advertisement

http://www.offthewallsoccer.com/

            Off the Wall Soccer involves many fun activities that include all ages. There is a youth league and also an adult flag football team! Section A requires us to evaluate the premise and make sure that all the tests are passed for an argument to be good. Off the Wall Soccer is a valid advertisement because the conclusion follows the premise and there is a lot of valid information involving the soccer league. All teams are open up to register for and there is good reason to believe the premises. Schedules, leagues, camps, specials and rules are all advertised on the website, so it is true that the advertisement is strong or valid. It is understood that our most reliable source of information comes from our own knowledge and experience. We can accept the claim that there are specials for new teams for the soccer club and that there are many opportunities to participate in from this website. 

Principle of Rational Discussion/ Repairing Arguments

         The Principle of Rational Discussion focuses on the assumption that other people:

         1. Knows about the subject under discussion

         2. Is able and willing to reason well.

         3. Is not lying.

The Principle of Rational Discussion is a guide to help asses and understand arguments.

The Concept of Repairing Arguments focuses on three main points:

1. The argument becomes stronger or valid.

2. The premises are plausible and would seem plausible to the other person.

3. The premise is more plausible than the conclusion.

Argument: Criminal Minds is a great show on television because it is suspenseful and action packed.

One should not dismiss this argument just because they are not interested in the television show or have not seen it before either. Criminal Minds involves a lot of action and it is incredibly suspenseful, but one might prefer CSI or Bones over Criminal Minds. The premise is plausible, but the premise needs to be more plausible than the conclusion. This argument is valid because throughout the show there is a lot of action and suspense due to the story line. It involves criminal and the BAU. We could make this argument stronger by providing facts that Criminal Minds won an Emmy Award to prove that it is a great show on television.

Violating the Principle of Rational Discussion

Ridicule: Making someone or something the butt of a joke in order to convince.

         A fallacy is a misleading notion and sometimes people can be confused during a discussion and be misled. Also, an argument might not even be present if a fallacy is used. Ridicule is a fallacy in which mockery is used for evidence in an argument. Ridicule is a violation of the Principle of Rational Discussion and many people ridicule others to get their point across. I don’t ridicule others because I don’t feel as if one should put someone or something down to argue their point.

         An example of ridicule that I have heard in the past is “you’re a girl, so you belong in the kitchen”. One of my guy friends always jokes around with girls and tells them that women belong in the kitchen and that’s all were good for. He always ridicules my girlfriends and me and tells us to go make him a sandwich or clean up after him. He needs to understand we aren’t his maid or slaves!  

Exercises on the Structure of Arguments

Exercise #1:

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

Argument: Yes.

Conclusion: The neighbor should clean up his cars in his yard because it creates an unsafe environment and also makes the neighborhood look trashy.

Additional Premises needed?: I believe that the writer should be more stern on his argument. 

Identify any subargument: All of the information is independent and supports the conclusion.

Good Argument?: All the premises look plausible, and the information is valid.

The writer stated enough information to make a solid conclusion, but I believe that he could have been more authoritative behind his voice. He stated that the cars look trashy in the neighborhood, but he could be more critical and state that the oil could be a health risk as well instead of it being “bad for the neighborhood”. He could also state that people are tired of looking at the clutter of cars in their neighborhood and it makes the neighborhood look very unclean. Going into further detail will help support the conclusion instead of just being vague and saying “people do not like living next door to such a mess”.  Premises 1, 2, and 3 support number 4. Overall, it is a good argument, it just needs a little more information for support. 

Weak Arguments

          I found a lot of information on what makes a strong argument and what consists of a weak argument. Earlier this week we discussed strong and valid arguments in detail, but I continued on to read what makes a weak argument.

         Weak arguments usually have little or no factual information and no established conclusion. One can go on a tangent about a topic and have no knowledge of what they are speaking about as well. Usually they have no sense or authority behind their facts and are not willing to be challenged.

         An example of a weak argument is “ I am employed.” This is a bad argument because there is not enough information given in the sentence. For one, we don’t know what type of job the person has. He could have any profession, so it is very vague. We also do not know the location of where the person works as well.

Strong vs Valid Arguments

Strong arguments can be either true or false, but the audience may be convinced more by the speaker’s knowledge and details of their argument. Strong arguments can be flawed interpretations of the truth and can be matters of opinions. An example of a strong argument is that “Santa Clause does not exist”. A young child and adult could argue about this topic for hours, but it would most likely end with the child in tears. A child would argue that Santa Clause comes down the chimney every year and that he is real because they take pictures with the man in the red suit at the mall. But an adult would explain that the man in the red suit is just a random stranger and that the parents actually put the presents under the tree and eat the cookies on the fireplace.

A valid argument has to be true unlike a strong argument. The conclusion usually follows the premise. Some valid arguments are not always good because they can have a premise that is not unlikely. A valid argument is that “tanning beds are bad for you”. There is no way to prove that this is false because the UV rays from the tanning beds can cause immense damage to one’s skin. 

The Tests for an Argument to Be Good

For an argument to pass as well written statement, there are three tests that need to be conducted. First off, the given information needs to be reasonable. One can’t be interested in whether an argument has strong points if they are uncertain if it is true or false. For the second test, the argument has to be more reasonable than the conclusion. Lastly, the argument needs to be strong and suitable for it to pass as a good argument.

The Saberkittens are cheerleaders. My best friends is a Saberkitten. Therefore, she is a cheerleader. This argument is valid because Saberkittens are cheerleaders for the San Jose Arena Football Team the Sabercats. My best friend has danced ever since she was little and she has cheered for the Sabercats for over a year. (Arena football games are also a lot of fun! I definitely recommend for everyone to try it out once when the season starts back up again!) This argument is also more plausible than the conclusion because the Saberkittens are a professional cheer team. This argument is strong and I believe it passes because it gives factual information. If you don’t believe me you can always look at the Saberkitten roster!

Intersubjective claim

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, inter-subjective is defined as involving two separate thoughts and establishing more than two themes. Some minds think alike, while others have different thoughts and opinions. For example, if one person believes that God exists and two other people are atheist, this becomes an inter-subjective claim because there are different thoughts at hand.

As we learned earlier from one of the prompts assigned, a subjective claim will convey one’s feelings and there is no way of telling if the claim can be proven true or false. Inter-subjective claims can’t always be certain as well because they are biased off of two different minds.

Intersubjective claims can coincide with one another and they happen to share some characteristics, but they will mostly contrast. 

Vague/ Ambiguous Sentences

 A vague sentence is not clearly expressed and it is also referred to as imprecise. One can give a vague sentence with out expressing oneself clearly and it can be short of an obvious meaning or character.  An ambiguous statement can have more than one meaning.  It is open to one or more interpretations and lacks clarity of the meaning.

On my first day of my sophomore year, I asked one of my friends where one of the buildings was on campus. She laughed and said it was “over there by the Olympic statues”. Being a sophomore, I should have known, but it was a long summer and I needed some refreshing of where all the buildings were on campus! Her statement did not really help me out because there are quite a few buildings near the Olympic statues. This was a vague sentence and it forced me to pull out my planner and look at the map of the campus.

An ambiguous statement that my friend said the other day was “the guy was so sick!”. An adult in our society would assume that the guy had the flu and had a serious health related problem. But our generation now a days refers to “sick” as awesome or cool. 

Subjective/Objective Claims

Subjective claims convey one’s feelings or opinions and cannot be proven true or false. The information comes from one’s personal experience, values and mind. Subjective claims usually come from personal preference and beliefs. Even though subjective claims may involve facts, the information may not always be true. One of my good friends believes that rap music is better than country music and this is his subjective claim. We continuously have an ongoing battle about the two genres of music and can never come to an agreement or understanding on the matter. I thoroughly enjoy country music and listen to it everyday, but he cannot stand the sappy lyrics and the country-twang style. He believes that country music is too depressing and he does not see the point of wasting money on country concerts. In my defense, I subjectively claim that rap music is too provocative and only demoralizes many aspects of our society.

Objective claims can be true or false and are usually used when one is making a rational decision. They are unbiased claims and are not based off of one’s beliefs or personal preference. Public material is usually used from objective claims as well. My personal experience with an objective claim happened when my best friend and I were driving to a restaurant Downtown San Jose. She insisted on making a right, but I kept telling her that she was not allowed to because it was a one-way street and the traffic was coming towards us. She insisted on making a right once more before she looked up and saw that the sign said that it was a one-way street.

Introduction

Hey class, I'm from Pleasant Hill, California. I am currently a sophomore at San Jose State. I am majoring in Liberal Studies and hope to pursue a career in teaching children with disabilities or in the third grade. I have been a waitress at a small Italian restaurant for almost three years and thoroughly enjoy the outdoors.