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.