Futher discussion

I felt that the fallacies could use more discussion because of how often they are used and people don't even realize it. I didn't even have one fallacy in particular because they are all used quite often. Most people don't know about fallacies if they haven't taken a course like this one. Often times we are drawn into buying things or voting for polititions because there are fallacies used in their arguments. Often times when someone runs for an office position they will appeal to your emotions because they know that if they can get you to feel good about yourself or them or bad about something their opponent did that you will vote for them. We just need to realize what their goal is and step back and really look at the situation at hand. I thought the fallacies were one of the more interesting parts of this class because i didn't know how many fallacies there were. If disscused and understood better it could really help in classes you take down the line.
Big Cat

Favorite thing about the class

My favorite thing about this class was being able to work it around my schedule. It was nice to be able to log on whenever and post my blog or my comments. It really helped because I had football and another class to worry about. Also when i got time to go home to San Diego I didn't have to worry about this class because i could get my posts done before i left and be set until the next week. That was great! The part I didn't like was the 12 hour spaces between the posts. I understood why we had to wait to post but I like to be able to get things done in one shot like these three posts. It wasn't that big of a deal to me but it was a hassle sometimes. For the most part i didn't really dislike much about this class it was a good experiance and would recommend this class to anyone i know because of the leniacy in the schedualing of time slots. 12 hours isn't a bad wait time it can just be a bummer sometimes.
Big Cat

What I have Learned...

What I have learned in this course mainly was how to be responsible. The difference from this responsibility and one from a normal class was that not once did we meet in a class room and not once did we talk in person with the teacher. Every week I had to check the website and make sure I was staying on top of my work because we didn't see a teacher anytime throughout the entire week to remind us we had homework. Also we had to be responsible with our groups because we relied on one another to do our part and turn it in on time. When looking at the class though i learned a lot about fallacies. I had never really heard of fallacies before so that was interesting to learn how to argue properly and not have fallacies in my argument. The appeal to emotion fallacy was my favorite because I feel that is used quite often in arguments because people know that the fastest way to beat someone in an argument is to get into their or the audiences emotions. I really enjoyed this class and learned a lot!
Big Cat

Group Discussion

For my group discussion i got together my 2 roommates, one of their girlfriends and a friend that lives close by us. I showed them my first paper i wrote which was about 5 dieting myths. I wrote that i agreed that not all ways of dieting are perfect. 3 of the four people i discussed with. One of my roommates disagreed with me and said that the myths are true, even though i had facts to show him that isn't nessicarily true. He didn't care though, he was set in his way. The discussion was more of an argument that was 3 on one so that was kind of funny. He didn't have any solid facts to back up his claims while i had evidence from the website we wrote our paper on. It was a nice way to see what other people thought and see it from a perspective of people who have not taken this class.

Mission Critical Website

The mission critical website was a very helpful website as well. The many definitions and variety of exersizes was really helpful in the learning process. I really enjoyed the definitions about common fallacies and non-rational argument techniques. A great part about the definitions was the quizzes at the end of them. It would first explain the definition and the provide an example quiz. It was a bummer to see that the site is still under construction because the visual maps of the venn diagrams would have really helped me in understanding conditionals and syllogisms. When reading the about mission critical it seems like a really good idea to help San Jose State University students. Hopefully the site will be fully functional soon because it could be very benificial to SJSU students and students all over!

Cause and Effect Website

I enjoyed the cause and effect website because the examples and definitions really helped me to further understand the material. The example showing what a lawyer would do in court really made sence to me because it really shows you how to form a good argument. I liked when it talked about post hoc reasoning which means that just because A came before B doesn't mean that A caused B. A lot of time people conclude that because one thing happened before another it means that the first event caused the second. This was an exelent website because it really helped me to draw a picture in my head with the bicycle example and how in depth it got with it. Sometimes i wish the Epstien text book would put chapters into something this simple and understandable.

Cause and Effect

Cause and effect was a pretty interesting topic discussed in the Epstien text. It seemed interesting to me because almost everything we do is cause and effect. The defininition for cause and effect Is that two events are tied together by the result in the end. An example would be someone is driving on the road and the brakes give out so they crash into the cars in front of them. This would make the brakes giving out as the cause and the effect would be the crashing of the cars in the end. Almost anything could be a cause and effect because something will always happen after an event. It was just interesting to read about in detailed language because it's not something you think about very often.

First Assignment

The first assignment was the most helpful to me. I felt this because not only did we have to collaborate as a group and research the subject we had to also do our own paper on the subject. My group did a subject on which diet myths were not true. This was helpful to me personally because I play football and we are often watching our weights, whether they are light or heavy, and have to adjust our weight to what the coaches want them at. Even though the one page individual summary we each wrote was extra work it really helped me to understand the article even more. I learned a lot through this assignment that i didn't know before. The second assignment was good also but when you split the work up not everyone understands all the aspects of the article because you just look for the part(s) you are doing.

Misleading Claims with Numbers

In chapter 13 misleading claims with numbers really stuck out because i had never heard of this. Misleading claims with numbers means that a company is putting out false or misleading numbers. An example would be when a shoe company says "40% off select shoes". First it could be misleading because you don't know if the price was marked up before or if its 40% off the retail price or the given price. Thats how companies draw people in with advertisments like this where you think the deal you are getting is good but its actually around the normal price. If it's 40% off the given price chance are its the same as regular retail price. I felt this was an important peice of the book due to so many companies posting clearances in thier stores everyday. People need to be more aware of misleading claims with numbers in everyday life!

Appeal to Emotion

Often appealing to emotions while arguing with people may seem to work and it is effective it is considered a fallacy. People use emotions to argue because if you make them feel good they will want to like you. If you make them feel angry towards your opponent they will want to side with you. The best is persuading people to help with a cause you are fighting for and making them feel bad for the people or things that are affected by the cause, like the ads on t.v. that show hungry kids in Africa or the puppies that have no home and have been abused. Emotions really help in these arguments because people see how bad these kids and animals have it and they want to help because they feel bad that they live comfortably but these victims don't. This is not something you'd want to use because it is actually a fallacy.

Aristotelian Logic: Syllogisms

I read about Aristotelian logic today in the Epstien text. My favorite part was probably about "syllogisms". A syllogism has a bunch of parts with two statements that are usually true and it all leads to a conclusion. Epstien also talks about catergorical syllogisms. A catergorical syllogism is an arguement with 2 premises and a conclusion. an example would be:

Dogs like to bark.
Cats aren't dogs.
So cats can't bark.

The first two would be claims and the last one a conclusion. I think these are used in everyday life quite often. We tend to draw conclusions about stuff by looking at the premises around and deduct a conculsion from that. I think that is basically what epstien is showing us in this chapter. A lot of what we read about is very applicable to real life and it is stuff we never really knew what it was called but we use it because it helps us communicate. 

Objections

In the epstien text I had the chance to read about objections. And example is, when I was young (about 10-12ish) I always wanted to move out of my parents house and live on my own. They would object to this and always would ask, "Who will you move in with?" "How will you pay rent?" "How will you get a job? You aren't old enough." I'd always try to counter-argue their claims but found that my counters were not strong enough to get the arguement in my favor.

In the text it suggests making a pros and cons list. That is when on one side you discuss the good side of your argument and on the other side you talk about the bad parts of your argument. Even if I would have done that their objections were too strong for my arguements and counter arguements.

General Claims

In chapter 8 of the epstien text, general claims are discussed. These are claims that we use in real life often but don't realize we do. There are 2 types of general claims precise and vague claims.

Precise claims are exactly what they say; they are very clear cut. An example would be "100% of student-athletes are required to to be in 12 units of schooling." It is clear cut that every single student-athlete has to take 12 units of schooling at least.

Vague claims are claims that use, almost, most and many; these are some at least. They don't specify clearly and use much to imagine from readers. An example is, "Many people love Disneyland." This is vague because it uses the word man and doesn't specify how many.

I felt this was an important point in the book because often times students are too vague in essays, speeches and real life communication.

Coumpound Claims

In chapter 6 of the Epstien text it discusses the composition of a compound claim. It is a compound claim because you have only two choices to make; if it is this or if it that. Compound claims are basically an "or" claim as well. An example would be "You either get elected president or you don't." The reason this is a compound claim is because you can not be both at one time, you are either the president or you are not the president. The way I percived it is that you are this OR you are that, which is where the "or" comes from in an "or" claim. I felt these were one of the easier concepts to grasp because it is either one or the other and is very straight to the point. I particularly liked this concept because it was simple and I feel that people use these claims a lot and don't even realize it.

Refuting an Argument

In the Epstien text, chapter 7, refuting an arguement is discussed. It talks about how people directly and indirectly refute arguements every day.

To directly refute an argument there are three ways to do this: You can prove that one premises is wrong, Prove the claim is not valid or strong, or Prove a false conclusion. The reason these are direct ways to refute an argument is because it is the most clear and concise way to disprove someones argument. If you can disprove one of the above then the person arguing does not have a leg to stand on.

To indirectly refute an argument you have to make the person arguing realize that they are wrong and the conclusion is not what they want. I believe that this is the harder way to argue most of the time. To do this you kind of "beat around the bush" until the person understands that they are not in the right.

Conditionals and Contradictories

In the Epstien text, chapter 6, section B is about conditionals. This caught my eye because I have learned about these in previous classes, but never that much about it. These are usually "if" and "when" claims. An example of this would be "If you are a bald, white male, then you must be a racist." The claim may be true for some people but it is not always true. The conditional claims make statements the can't always be proven to be true. I thought this was an interesting section because I feel we often make these claims and don't even realize it.

Criteria for accepting or rejecting

 A lot of people decide that they will accept ads too early. I feel this is an extrodanary thing that  people think that just because someone  is reliable is on the cover that they think it is reliable. i think this is an important subject.  If you believe in your self you'll be right. It's all about how much you believe in yourself. A lot of times people wanted us to drink in the dorms because they stars do it in movies and we didn't because we knew better.

Advertising on the Internet

Often times we see internet advertisement and want to buy into the propaganda. A very popular piece of advertisement on the internet is the Got Milk ads. These ads take a famous actor, actress, singer, ect. and they put a white milk mustache across their upper lip.

Here's an example: http://www.youngry.com/from-print-ads-to-internet-ads-dont-make-this-very-common-novice-mistake/

In this example they have used Halle Berry as their star. Just because a star is endorsing it people want to believe that the product is good and they can trust it. In milk's case they probably can trust it but this is just an example of how using a face everyone knows helps the companies to get people to buy their product.

Violating the Principle of Rational Discussion

In chapter 11 Epstein discusses what violating the principle of rational disscussion means. He says that it is when someone does not understand rational arguement or they are purposly trying to mislead. Here are some fallacies.

Begging the question: In an arguement you must prove that the claim you make is true so the premises of an arguemnet have to be stronger than the ending of it.

Strawman: Put words in your opponents mouth to misrepresent it because it's easier to make their arguement look bad.

Shifting the Burden: Make your opposition prove your claims wrong rather than prove them yourself.

Relevancy: It's not a fallacy but rather an observation that the claim being made is weak and you can't repair it.

Slanters, concealing bad claims by using misleading language and Ridicule, making someone the butt of the joke are also violations.

An example is when a politicians argue for elections they often put words in eachothers mouths and make claims their opponent has to disprove.  They also use slanters very often; as well as ridicule each other.

Vague and Ambiguious

Vague and Ambiguious sentences are similar but they are still different enough to have different description names. A vague sentence is when the thought can be passed as many different meanings and the only way we could tell what the writter meant is if he elaborated further on the thought. An ambiguious sentence is when there is only a couple ways we could possibly percive the sentence.

An example of a vague sentence would be "I always get lucky when I play at Sycuan Casino." This is vague because it may be plausable but the problem is, how can we really tell if it is? I found it funny that after some examples the author talked about how most of our sentences are vauge and we don't notice it. He used an example about a student saying "My teacher was late on Tuesday." Which Tuesday was it? How late?... Get the point?

An example of an Ambiguious statement would be, "Half of the class cares a lot about their work." This would be ambiguious becasuse what does the other hald do, not care?

I think it is really tough to tell between these two types of statements but thats what makes them intriguing.

Valid vs Strong

The differences between a vaild arguement and a strong arguement can often be a fine line but if you know the difference and stop to think about it, it can help a lot. A valid arguement is an arguement that can not be proven wrong by anyone. A strong arguement is an arguement is one that may possibly be right but not always is right.

An example of a valid arguement would be that to legally drive a car by yourself in the state of California you have to be 16, have insurance and have passed your permit test and own a legal licence. This would be valid because no one can argue that anyone under that age can legally operate a car. And if you are that age you must have insurance and a licence.

An example of a strong arguement would be that you can drive a car even if you don't have a licence. This would be a strong arguement because you may be able to operate the car but just because you can doesn't mean it is legal and you're allowed to drive it. If you were to get caught you'd get in trouble with the law and be punnished.

In the end the diffence between the two arguements is that a vaild arguement is always true. A strong arguement may be true but isn't always true.

Reasoning: Objective and Subjective

The differences between objective and subjective can be hard to tell but in the end it boils down to one is an actual fact and the other is just an opinion. A subjective way of reasoning is when it is a persons opinion on a topic. For example, I was in a discussion the other day about the differences in how firm a mattress should be. I said that firm mattress' are way better than soft mattress'. This is not a proven fact but rather my personal opinion making this an example of subjective reasoning. An example of objective reasoning would be a clear fact. For example, in the United States a person can not legally purchase any tobacco product until the age of 18. This is objective because it is a federal law that is enforced and it is 18 everywhere not just when people want it to be. Sometimes it can be tough to tell but you just have to keep in mind that subjective is an opinion from a subject. Objective is a fact, so remember that objects are facts.   

Intro

Hi class,

My names Big Cat. And to be honest I'm pretty sure I got the nickname because every time my roommates threw me off the bed I'd land on my feet. I am from San Diego, California and I am a sophmore now.

The only COMM class I've taken is COMM 20 Public Speaking. I liked it personally but I don't know what to expect from critical thinking.

I hope to understand more about COMM 41 and critical thinking and what it means.

I've also never had an online class so this is a first for me.

I enjoy hanging with friends and playing football which I play at SJSU.

Until next time,
Big Cat