A little help here!

Since this was an online calss, being able to understand certain concepts were more difficult to do since we wouldn't be able to fully discuss our questions or confusions with each other.  When looking over the material that we have discussed, the most difficult chapter for me would be Epstein's chapter 9 on Concealed Claims.  In this chapter we learned the concepts Euphemism and Dysphemism.  Euphemism is when a word or phrase that makes something sound better than a neutral description and Dysphemism is when a word or phrase that makes something sound worse than a neutral description. Although the text gives examples of these concepts, it does not go into depth or detail in how we can apply these concepts or how to use these concepts in words.  In our daily conversations, story telling, etc. these concepts are shown in the way we speak but we do not notice at all.  A way that we are blinded by these concepts are in commercials.  Advertisements overly exaggerate the greatness in their products and we completely fall for them and believe it.

What I have learned

Honestly before taking this class, I had no idea what I was getting myself into.  Knowing that the class was about Critical Thinking, I thought that I would be bored by a lot of situations and stumped by a lot of difficult scenarios.  Little did I know, I learned concepts that I could relate to and apply to my daily life.  We learned many concepts and terms, but what stood out to me were the arguments.  I really never thought about analyzing arguments or even being able to determine that they were good, bad, invalid, strong, or weak.  I just thought arguments are arguments and if it wasn't good enough you were going to lose the argument.  From this past semester, I learned that bad arguments can be unrepairable and these bad arguments are called fallacies.  I really enjoyed learning about fallacies simply because of the names that fallacies were called, such as: strawman, and shifting the burden of proof.  These terms are easy to remember and we can easily spot them in arguments that occur in our lives.

A few of my favorite things...and not so favorite

This was my first time taking an online class and it taught me a lot.  My favorite part about the class was being able to work in groups of people from the class. I honestly was not expecting meeting anyone at until the last test, but it was an awesome experience getting to know people instead of being complete strangers taking a final at the end of the semester.  I loved working in groups; despite the fact that it does become difficult due to everyone's different schedules conflicting all the time, I liked getting to know our group from the beginning of the semester to the end.  What made things a lot easier was that we were able to stay with the same group throughout the semester; I became more comfortable and confident in our group.  The least favorite part and something that can be improved is having all of the blogs finished in 12 hour intervals.  I understand that this helps us become disciplined and up to date with our deadlines, but it does become difficult.  I mean, I took an online class because of my time constraints this semester; I wanted to be able to do things on my own time.  And having to turn in things in 12 hour intervals were tough because of my hectic schedule.  I always had to them towards the end of the week. I think it should be up to the students when to do their blogs but still have a due date, just like 11:59pm at the end of the week.  That way, things will still get done accomodation will be up to the student.

Mission Critical

The Mission Critical website was very helpful because it works as a tool in review of the past semester.  The website goes over most of the topics that we have discussed in the book and also brought new topics.  The concept that I thought that was brought up and I saw as practical was vagueness and ambiguity.  These words can be difficult to understand, but I was able to clear the differences between these concepts.  It's difficult to understand because vagueness and ambiguity seem to have similar definitions.  Something that is vague is defined as something that is general, and unclear.  Something that is ambiguous has the ability to have a variety of different meanings. 


An example of vagueness is shown in this sentence:
That is a hot song
This is an example of vagueness because it is unclear that the song is actually hot in temperature, but in actuality it is hot as in a hit. It is used in a slang manner.


An example of ambiguity is shown in this sentence:
The grass is always greener on the other side.
This is an example of ambiguity because this can be interpreted in different ways. One, that the grass is a different shade of green on the other side. Two, there is always something better for you. It's all int he way you look at things.

Evaluating an Analogy

After learning the different types of reasonings, one of the concepts that stood out was reasoning by analogy. A part that was discussed in Epstein's chapter 12 was about how we go about evaluating these analogies.  Epstein gives us questions to use as a guideline when analyzing an analogy.  It is beneficial to us because it helps us in our critical thinking, making sure we are moving towards the right idea or actually comprehending the reasoning.  These are the steps/questions used to help as a guideline in evaluating analogies:
-Is this an argument? What is the conclusion?
-What is the comparison?
-What are the premises? (one or both sides of the comparison)

-What are the similarities

-Can we state the similarities as premises and find a general principle that covers the two sides?

-Does the general principle really apply to both sides? Do the differences matteR?

-Is the argument strong or valid? Is it good?

When encountering an analogy, we can easily analyze it and determine whether the analogy is a good argument or not by using these guideline questions. 

Reasoning by Criteria

Among all of the types of reasonings, I was having a hard time trying to comprehend the concept of Reasoning of Criteria.  I think that the main reason for my confusion is that I do not have a concrete idea of what criteria actually is.  When doing research on this concept, I made sure to look up the definition of the word "criteria", according to dictionary.com Criteria is "a standard of judgment or criticism; a rule or principle for evaluating or testing something. " Although I had the definition, I still did not understand the concept so I looked up the synonyms for it and came up with: standard, measure, basis. In my opinion, the concept of Reasoning by Criteria is making an argument based on established information, or maybe something simple like a fact. Having facts, these types of arguments are reasonable and valid which end up not being much of an argument anyway.

Types of Reasoning

Different types of reasoning allow us to have different kinds of effect on individuals with the way we reason. 

1. Reasoning by analogy draws conclusions from comparing similar things when it is part of an argument. If one thing is one way with the other thing, the same should be for objects of a similar relationship.
   Example: My sister goes homes early yet doesn't have a social life. I have a social life and still have to go home early.
2. Sign reasoning is similar to judging a book by its cover because it draws conclusions due to appearance or other indicators.
   Example: Bree didn't smile at me when I shook her hand; Bree doesn't like me. 
3. Causal reasoning uses cause and effect.
   Example: I got home from dance practice at 1:00am in the morning. I overslept and didn't make it to my 7:30am class. 
4. Reasoning by criteria uses established criteria for future conclusions.
   Example: Clothing made out of 100% cotton shrink all the time. I shouldn't machine dry 100% cotton clothes.
5. Reasoning by example uses other valid examples for arguments.
   Example: Lisa stretches for 15  minutes every night. She is more flexible now and is able to do the splits in gymnastics. Stretching helps a lot.
6. Inductive reasoning uses past observations to make conclusions or generalizations, with the probability that it is could be false.
   Example: Gasoline prices went up in the past few days. Gas prices will continue to rise. 
7. Deductive reasoning is the opposite of inductive reasoning in that it uses generalizations for specific claims.
   Example: If I practice, I will improve on my dancing skills. I practiced everyday, and did well in the dance audition.

Apple Polishing

Throughout chapter 10 in Epstein's book, we learned about the Appeal to Emotion and the different aspects that it is made up of.  One of the concepts that I thought was interesting was Apple Polishing, which is actually a particular way of using the Appeal to Vanity approach in arguments. Apple Polishing is a type of feel-good argument  in which a person uses flattery, and excessive compliments, in an attempt to win support for their side. In my opinion, this is not 'apple polishing', more like sucking up! An example of this approach in action is when a good-looking, handsom advertiser is selling a new dietary fiber bar or snack to an overweight woman.  The advertisement can butter the buyer up, telling them that they actually look slimmer and that their product will be beneficial to their amazing 'figure' and will keep them in shape, when in reality the product probably has a lot of sugar and what not and would not help the buyer's diet.  The overweight buyer will fall for this heartmelting advertiser and spend spend spend!

Exercise #3

When I think of the Appeal to Fear approach and how it is used through advertising, I automatically think about commercials about anti-smoking. I believe that these advertisements are very powerful and can grab the attention of any average smoker and possibly bring them to their senses; I mean that's what the advertisements are supposed to do right? I honestly say that every anit-smoking advertisement that I have ever seen has scared me and prevents me from ever starting to smoke cigarettes. In these advertisements, smokers are put into fear about dying early, getting a hole in their throat, having damaged lungs, second-handedly hurting the people they love or even strangers around them, being a victim of all sorts of cancers, and of course dying of an early age.

In this particular ad I found (1st picture), a baby is surrounded by the dangerous second-hand smoke that a loved one is creating around him.  This presents the harmful effects of smoking and that it can affect anyone, especially our little ones. This is a good argument because the premises and conlusion are true based on strong examples given.



Appeal to Pity

A concept that I learned about was Appeal to Emotion which according to Epstein is defined as a premise that says, roughly, you should believe or do something because you feel a certain way.  When actually breaking down the appeal to emotion into detail, we learn that are specific ways that are used to win people over with their emotions.  The particular aspect of appealing to emotion that drew my attention was Appeal to Pity.  When advertisers are trying to sell a product or trying to help a cause, they aim toward buyers' hearts; making sure that they have melted their hearts and that they feel so bad about the issue that they have to help.  These arguments are often presented through television advertisements.  An example of an advertisement using the approach of appealing to pity would be an ASPCA commerical.  In these commercials, they present pictures of abused, hurt, and battered animals who are in desperate need of help. Along with this advertisement, the song "Arms of an Angel" by Sarah mcLachlan is playing and she also speaks out for the cause.  Using this approach, animal lovers and pet owners feel so hurt and moved because of what they see; they have pity for these animals and no longer want to see domestic violence and decide to donate.

Chapter 6 - Contrapositives

In Chapter 6 of Epstein, we learn about the importance and requirements of a contra-positive claim.  In order for two claims to be considered to be equivalent, they both have to be considered to be true.  From my understanding, Contra-positive statements are defined as the situation in which a claim and a contra-positive claim are related or similar. Both claims must coincide; either both true or both false. 
The following are examples of true claims; a contra-positive statement:
a. Hard working students get good grades.
b. Students that complete all their homework and classwork assignments will get good grades.

The following are examples of contra-positive statements including a sufficient condition; which the first claim is sufficient for the second claim. (There are 4 different types of conditions:
direct, indirect, affirming the consequent, and denying the antecedent)
a. Johnny always drinks milk when eating his cookies.  If Johnny is eating cookies, he is drinking milk.

Chapter 7

In Epstein's chapter 7, the topic that is being taught is Raising Objections. The key term that was presented was Counterarguments.  When we look at the word counterarguments, I automatically think of a comeback towards an argument.  Counterarguments are often used in conversations and formal arguments. A synonym of counterarguments that we hear more often is 'rebuttal'.  The reasons for making a counterargument are mainly because in one's opinion, the argument is bad and that their reasoning is better.  Counterarguments usually come off as interruptions, corrections, or a strong difference in opinion.
According to Epstein there are three ways to refute an argument:
1. Show that at least one of the premises is dubious.
2. Show that the argument isn't valid or strong.
3. Show that the conclusion is false.
The book also describes this refuting as “showing that at least one of several claims is false or dubious, or collectively they are unacceptable, by drawing a false or unwanted conclusion from them” (Epstein, p. 150).

Chapter 6

In chapter 6 of Epstein's reading, the overall topic that is being is taught are compund claims.  Epstein teachs us the definition, the function, and ways to apply these claims in our arguments.  According to the reading, a compound claim is known as an alternate; two combined claims with the words 'or' and 'and' which then transforms into a single claim.  To put this definition in simplier terms, 'two becomes one'.  When comparing this term to grammar, it is practically the same concept as compound sentences, even when using the same words to conjoin the two ideas.  An example of two claims becoming a compound claim:
-I will treat you out to dinner.
-I will take you to the movies.

When these claims are combined using the word 'and', the compound claim is stating that the person will receive both dinner and a night to the movies.  When these claims are combined using the word 'or', the compound claim is stating that the person will receive on or the other and not both. These keywords determine the conclusion of the claims so one must be cautious in using the correct word.

Bad Appeal to Common Belief

After reading chapter 5 of Epstein, we learn about how bad appeals are used and applied in our daily lives.  Bad appeal to common belief is defined as accepting a claim to be true only after seeing that other people belive the claim as well.  The bad appeal to common belief is a popular mistake that affects the way we reason or make opinions on claims.  A common term or known phrase that is often used is 'Hopping the bandwagon'.  This mistake normally occurs when people are under the pressure of their peers, role models, or people that hold high credibility.  An example of bandwagoning would pretain to sports.  A lot of people are not usually a fan of a sports team unless the team is on a winning streak and not from the start. They join the fanbase of a sports team only because everyone else is supporting them and not solely on their own opinion.

Fix it!

Arguments that are not completely comprehensive basically mean that they are lacking information or details.  When an argument fails to be strong it is then invalid due to the fact it is misunderstood.  Statements are ambiguous and can be interpreted in many different ways; especially when premises are left out.  After our reading, I learned that in order to make a transition from an invalid, misunderstood argument into a strong and valid argument, we must repair the argument by following three rules:

1.The argument becomes stronger or valid.
2. The premis is plausible and would seem plausible to the other person.
3. The premise is more plausible than the conclusion.

An example of an argument that needs to be repaired is:
Tom is outside. There is smoke outside. This argument is lacking premises that will help direct the argument into a plausible conclusion.  Without the needed premises, this argument is making an accusation that Tom is the cause of the smoke. A statement moving against this argument could be that Tom does not smoke at all.  In order to repair this argument, the argument needs premises that provide information of where the smoke is coming from and why is Tom outside. An example of a transformed argument is:
Tom is outside and takes a drag of his cigarette, and there is smoke outside; therefore Tom is smoking.

Online Advertising

http://www.shopjustice.com/

Online advertisements do not only help with online sales but also sales from the actual stores.  This coupon reaches out to customers who are available to go to the stores and customers who are comfortable in their own homes. This is a coupon that is sent to frequent customers of the store Justice. In order to redeem these coupons, customers must share their information with the cashier of the store firsthand.  This process of sending out coupons and information for discounts online is more efficient since everybody has access to the internet and not everybody is able to go to the store.  I can honestly say that these methods are reliable because I actually work at a Justice store in a local mall.  Since the online emails stop when customers do not continue to visit the actual store, it actually forces customers to go to the actual store, and there for bring in more business.  The fact that the emails are sent by the actual company gives the discounts credibility and keeps trust among customers and the company.  It is mentioned in Epstein's book that "reputable authority whom we can trust as an expert on this kind of claim and who has no motive to mislead” (Epstein. P. 87).  Also, “the claim is in a media source that’s usually reliable and has no obvious motive to mislead, and the original source is named” (p.90) which means that these discounts were sent solely to help the customers save money when buying from their business; they want to gain a good relationship with their buyers.

Argument or not?

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.
3. He never drives any of them.
4. They all look old and beat up and leak oil all over the place.
5. It is bad for the neighborhood, and it will decrease property value.

This is clearly an argument; in conclusion to this argument, it is not necessary for the neighbor to forcefully remove the cars that are in the yard.  Possible additional premises that would be needed would be if the neighbor had no intention of driving any of the cars, driving all of his cars which causes more pollution to the environment, or if the cars were taking up space from other neighbor's property. Statement number 5 is whats leads the connection of statements 2 and 1. Statement number 1 is being supported by 2 and 3. This is not considered to be a good argument.

I found this argument useful because it is an example that is very relatable.  Many situations like this happen when the premises do not all actually support a conclusion.  Some of the premises do not relate to or affect the conclusion at all.  Some people like to pick fights and bring in support that has absolutely nothing to do with the argument; it happens all the time and arguments become endless and useless.

"I've got you in the palm of my hand"

Manipulation of one's mind is what is happening once another is using the "Appeal to Emotion" fallacy in order to change the opinion of an individual.  Not only is the mind being manipulated, but the emotions.  In the terms of Epstein, the fallacy is committed to change one's opinion into accepting a claim to be true. When a person's emotions are being played with, the mind no longer has control or even functions clearly due to the way a person is feeling.  This fallacy is used everyday and people do not even realize it; they don't realize that they are under a spell.  Advertisements and commercials use this fallacy to get buyers to purchase their products all the time.  I would think that this is the most used fallacy in the media.  Advertisements that present products to help change or better an individual's outside appearance is what gets to one's emotions.  People feel that their outside appearance is not good enough or up to par with the media, which is why they turn to these products in order to feel better about themselves.  Another example where this fallacy is committed is when people in relationships argue.  One end of the relationship can tell the other that they are still in love with them keeping an invisible hold on them but at the same time this end is hurting them physically.  The feelings and the love that the person who is being abused has is overpowering their true thoughts and thinking.  Emotions are very powerful.  If one cannot control their emotions, they can be controlled by anybody.

Communicating in Organizations

In chapter 4 of the Group Communication book, the functions of an organization is broken down and described in detail.  I can personally relate to this topic due to the fact that I am an officer of a cultural organization on campus.  Although I know the basic ways of running an organization and working with others in a cabinet, I have learned the specific terms and reasons why an organization is run in a specific manner.  Of course, in all organizations there is a hierachy in which is a group of people that work in a chain according title or status.  For example. the head of a hierarchy would be the President and next in the chain of command would be the Vice President, then the Secretary, and so on.  In order for an organization to work well and become successful, the communication between the hierarchy and the other groups that make the organization must be clear.  Amongst the little groups that make up the organization are usually team leaders and general members, or in other terms superiors and subordinates.  These people, from my opinion, are the foundation of the organization. Without them, there would be no purpose for the hierarchy; therefore, their ideas and needs must be communicated with the hierarchy.  Between all of the people within the organization there needs to be an openness, which will allow the group to avoid 'imbalances' or discrepancies.

The Three Tests

There are three ways to test out an argument to determine whether or not the argument is considered to be "good".  From reading Epstein's "Critical Thinking", the three tests that were mentioned are: 1. The premises are plausible, 2. The premises are more plausible than the conclusion, 3. The argument is valid or strong. An example of a good argument must fulfill the ideas of these tests.  The thing about good arguments is that they can either be considered strong or valid as well.  Sometimes arguments that fall under "strong arguments" can be seen as a better argument than a "valid argument".  This is true because strong arguments are based on pure opinion and feeling.  Although strong arguments are only plausible and not completely true, they can seem that way.  An example of a good argument is: "Top Gun is one of the most sought after rides at Great America." This is a good argument because it is plausible and an opinion which can lead to a possibly conclusion of "Top Gun is the best ride at Great America".

Time Pressures

Every assignment, task, or duty given is never sent out without a due date.  Without due dates, situations become unorganized and work becomes worthless.  Time management is a skill that an individual must work on in order to become successful.  But when it comes to working in a group, time management is more difficult to achieve.   Some problems that can possibly occur when working in a group are: 1. Nobody takes initiative; whereas everyone in the group is afraid to take charge or step over each other and the never-ending waiting begins. 2. Time is wasted; the group can become uncontrollable because there is no organization or understanding.

Leadership establishment is a must when working in groups.  In "The Essential Guide to Group Communication" book, three ways are presented to teach and guide students in groups towards working against time pressures: 1. A group may begin a discussion by taking a nonabiding poll. 2. The leader may impose time limits on certain components of a discussion. 3. The group may not make any decision at all. With these guidelines, groups are working together in a structured manner and will successfully meet their quotas.

These guidelines were very helpful when it came to our class group work.  One of the members of our group quickly emailed all of the members and asked us what we thought was the best idea on how to meet, contact each other, etc.  Somebody took the initiative to get things started.

Strong vs Valid Arguments

Arguments occur all the time due to the face that people have different opinions and feelings towards certain situations.  If people had the same ideas then everyone would just agree on everything and arguments would not exist; life would be boring! After reading chapter 3, we learn from Epstein that arguments are valid or successful when the conclusion is false, in which there is no possible way for the premises to be true. To determine an argument to be strong, its premise has a possiblity of being true, but its conclusion is still leading to be false.

An example of a strong argument is: "People are more successful when they go to college."
In a lot of cases its premise is true.  There have been many students that have graduated college and have become successful in their careers.  On the other hand, college is not for everyone; therefore, the conculsion of the argument is false.  Some people that have not attended college, still manage to become successful in life as well.

An example of a valid argument is: "I am not allergic to chicken." This is personally something I have just learned; I absolutely love to eat chicken, but my body has been rejecting it.  I can always try to eat it but the conclusion will alway be true and lead to breaking out in rashes. :(

Subjective vs Objective Claims

Claims that are made, whether fact or fiction are based on personal standards or opinions as known to be subjective.  Claims that are made without personal basis and are solely facts are known to be objective. 

When a subjective claim is made it is based on personal opinion or feeling; therefore, it would only be true towards the person making the claim and it would be false towards other people who do not agree on the other's claim.  A subjective claim that I have a lot recently was: "Dancing to choreography is not easy."  From my perspective, this claim is true due to the fact that I have not been dancing for a very long time and that I have not trained long enough to have mastered the different techniques in dancing choreography.  In other perspectives, this claim can be false to dancers who have been dancing for years and are able to adapt to choreography easier.  There are many different people that can disagree with this claim; therefore, it is subjective.  To convert this subjective claim to an objective claim, detail must be added in.  For example one way to see it as objective: "Practice makes perfect."  This is based on a factual claim; when you practice you are closer to perfection.  Everyone can agree on this claim and it is universal.

Vague.

Many words and phrases in the English language are ambiguous, meaning that they are able to fit many different possible meanings and are subject to change meaning depending on how it is used.  I personally hate that, because it causes a lot of conflict and confusion in my daily life.  When people say things or ask questions that are very vague, I'm left to do more work in my mind trying to figure out 'What is it exactly that they want or asking for?' I NEED MORE DETAIL! An example of a vague question that I recently encountered was: "What are your strengths?" It was understood that I was being asked about my leadership skill strengths due to the fact that I was in a leadership conference, but this is an overall vague question.  An answer given could be based on someone's physical strength which would be completely off topic.

Relationships is also an area in which people are very vague.  There is a song by Mike Posner entitled "Ambiguous".  In this song, Mike is confused with what his girl wants, whether she wants to stay as friends with benefits or move on towards a relationship.

Inception? No, Perception.

First impressions are very important and are the jumpstart to any relationship or communication.  First impressions are what affect our perception on others.  When we first have our perception on somebody after meeting them or in this case reading what someone has to say, we then judge that person based on our observations.  Perception on a person is also affected by our own personal background. For example, if I read an idea from someone the wrong way, I could make an unfair judgement; or if someone comes off too outgoing to another person, they can see the other person as loud and obnoxious when in reality, they are just trying to adjust to a new environment.  Before people make their perceptions on anyone in a group, they must first stay open-minded because everyone in a group is a different individual.  As an individual, people come from all different backgrounds and have different thoughts.  In order for a group to work well together, everyone must have a positive attitude and good understanding so that conflicts do not occur.

Introductory Post

Hello professor and classmates! My Name is Rachelle; my friends call me Chelle, or Rah. I am a second year at SJSU majoring in Communications Studies. So far I have taken a Public Speaking class and an Interpersonal Relations Communications class at San Jose State. In the past, I've always been involved in Leadership activities in High School up until today. I've always enjoyed speaking to peers whether in groups or when emceeing an event. I'd like to think that I'm very friendly and that I get along with almost anybody. I'm very outgoing and love to be spontaneous. At San Jose State, I'm involved with Akbayan, which is one of the Filipino American organizations on campus as its Community Affairs Chair. So if you'd like to join or actually meet me, you can come by our table that is in front of the SU! :) From this online class, I'm hoping that I will be able to improve my communications skills through these blogs.  Sometimes when reading and typing things aren't completely comprehended and sometimes misunderstood when read wrong, so hopefully I will do a good enough job so that everyone will know where I stand in these blogs.