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.