2). Discuss the usefulness of the first or second major course assignment. Use specific examples.
The first assignment's, which was Critical Thinking in News and Politics, the usefulness of the first assignment to me was how as a group we had to apply most of the concepts we had learned before hand from the book. Reading the Epstein book was helpful because it gave explicit definitions and numerous examples. Yet, when you had to read an article and apply it to the article then write a paper on it. It becomes relatively hard to accomplish. At first, I was confused and odd by all the things as a group we were expected to locate from a simple political article. I thought it was nearly impossible. However, I reviewed the book and then analyzed the article and realize there were indeed connections. This project even though at first seem impossible as I reviewed the Epstein book it began to become an easier task. Another usefulness of the first assignment was I got an opportunity to work with my group mates and met new people along the way. Overall, that was what I found useful from the first major course assignment.
Thank you everyone! :] Have a great night!
Friday, October 21, 2011
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Discussion Questions: Week Eight
1). Discuss one concept in Chapter 8 that you found useful. Please explain the concept and give a personal example or personal story.
For this discussion question I will be discussing "General Claims and Their Contradictories." This concept displays words such as "All", "Some", "No", and "Only" and then it states its contradictories. Additionally, I have learned that using "All", "Some", and "Only" gives a valid argument but the argument is weak. For example, I remember I was having a conversation with my coworker at work and we were talking about cuisines from different countries. My coworker and I stumbled upon a discussion about Chinese food which led to Panda Express. I told him that "All" Asians know that Panda Express is not real Chinese food. The claim I was making was that "All Asians" know yet is it a true claim. The "All" I used made the claim weak even though the claim is valid its a weak claim. I could have used another term like "Most" because it doesn't have a guarantee attached to it that every Asian person suppose to know that Panda Express is not real Chinese food instead it states most Asian knows.
Alright, thank you for reading everyone! :D
For this discussion question I will be discussing "General Claims and Their Contradictories." This concept displays words such as "All", "Some", "No", and "Only" and then it states its contradictories. Additionally, I have learned that using "All", "Some", and "Only" gives a valid argument but the argument is weak. For example, I remember I was having a conversation with my coworker at work and we were talking about cuisines from different countries. My coworker and I stumbled upon a discussion about Chinese food which led to Panda Express. I told him that "All" Asians know that Panda Express is not real Chinese food. The claim I was making was that "All Asians" know yet is it a true claim. The "All" I used made the claim weak even though the claim is valid its a weak claim. I could have used another term like "Most" because it doesn't have a guarantee attached to it that every Asian person suppose to know that Panda Express is not real Chinese food instead it states most Asian knows.
Alright, thank you for reading everyone! :D
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Discussion Questions: Week Six
3). Pick one concept from either text, not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it. Use either Chapter 6 or Chapter 7.
I will be discussing from chapter 6 "contradictory of a claim" for example,
the claim: Heather's cat slept on top of my car.
contradictory: Heather's cat did not sleep on top of my car.
Analysis: The two claims on the top show clear contradictory. Contradictory claims are claims that is opposite of what the spoken claim is. So like the example the claim was "...cat slept on my car.." the contradictory claim will include not because its opposite. stating, "...cat did not sleep on my car.."
Now, we'll be discussing "contradictory of an 'or' claim" for example,
the claim: Sarah will put on her sweater, or Sarah won't go out tonight.
contradictory: Sarah will not put on her sweater, and Sarah will go out tonight.
Analysis: In order to make an "or" claim to be contradictory we have to put an "not" in the first part of the statement then replace "or" with "and" then change the "not" in the second part of the statement to a can type of statement.
Finally, "contradictory of an and claim" for example,
claim: Fred could eat 12 hot dogs in five minutes, but Mindy couldn't.
contradictory: Fred can't eat 12 hot dogs in five minutes, or Mindy can eat 12 hot dogs in five minutes.
Analysis: For these types of claims we have to change the "and" type of claims to "or" types of claims. Also since its a contradictory type of claim there must be a "not" in the beginning. Additionally, once we change the wording of the claim it changes the overall meaning of the sentence. But that is overall how you change from single claims to compound claims.
Alright, thank you everyone for reading! :]
I will be discussing from chapter 6 "contradictory of a claim" for example,
the claim: Heather's cat slept on top of my car.
contradictory: Heather's cat did not sleep on top of my car.
Analysis: The two claims on the top show clear contradictory. Contradictory claims are claims that is opposite of what the spoken claim is. So like the example the claim was "...cat slept on my car.." the contradictory claim will include not because its opposite. stating, "...cat did not sleep on my car.."
Now, we'll be discussing "contradictory of an 'or' claim" for example,
the claim: Sarah will put on her sweater, or Sarah won't go out tonight.
contradictory: Sarah will not put on her sweater, and Sarah will go out tonight.
Analysis: In order to make an "or" claim to be contradictory we have to put an "not" in the first part of the statement then replace "or" with "and" then change the "not" in the second part of the statement to a can type of statement.
Finally, "contradictory of an and claim" for example,
claim: Fred could eat 12 hot dogs in five minutes, but Mindy couldn't.
contradictory: Fred can't eat 12 hot dogs in five minutes, or Mindy can eat 12 hot dogs in five minutes.
Analysis: For these types of claims we have to change the "and" type of claims to "or" types of claims. Also since its a contradictory type of claim there must be a "not" in the beginning. Additionally, once we change the wording of the claim it changes the overall meaning of the sentence. But that is overall how you change from single claims to compound claims.
Alright, thank you everyone for reading! :]
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Discussion Questions: Week Six
2). Please discuss, in detail, what you learned from reading Chapter 7. Discuss at least 2 things you learned.
Chapter 7 titled, "Counter Argument" by Epstien. This chapter is mainly about raising counter arguments towards what the person is saying. For the refuting an argument directly portion of the reading. In order to refute it directly, you should show at least one of the premises is dubious, show that the argument is either weak or invalid, and lastly show that the final conclusion is false.
For example,
Dick: Fred you shouldn't eat any type of food pass 9PM. Because eating pass 9PM can lead to weight gain. So if you don't eat anything after 9PM then you'll lose weight. Also If you gain weight how would you ever get a girlfriend.
How would Fred refute this argument? Well, Fred can counter attack the premises by making it dubious. So Fred could state all the calories that he consumed before 9PM. For example, what if Fred for breakfast ate five donuts, two bagels topped with bacon, egg, and tons of cheese. Then lunch, Fred ate fried chicken with gravy, four slices of pizza, and five McDonald quarter pounder hamburgers. Lastly, for dinner two hours before 9PM Fred ate a 72 OZ steak. Okay, that was an exaggeration of how much a person could eat but that argument does counter attack Dick's argument. So even though Fred does not eat anything after 9PM his overall calorie count would be off the chart and he still will be gaining weight.
The second topic of discussion is to refute indirectly. This refute can be seen as harder than refuting directly because indirect refutes means when you read an argument you can't point out anything is wrong with it directly.
For example, Jim is a very opinionated person. Once he hears something he does not like he will immediately decide it not worth listening to and argue with anyone that opposes his opinion.
To indirectly argue the example we could say, Jim has a hard time being open minded and seeing both sides. He tends to not accept other's opinion because he likes to stick with what he knows. This indirect comment hints that Jim is opinionated but it presents it in a lighter manner and less direct way.
Thanks for reading everyone! :]
Chapter 7 titled, "Counter Argument" by Epstien. This chapter is mainly about raising counter arguments towards what the person is saying. For the refuting an argument directly portion of the reading. In order to refute it directly, you should show at least one of the premises is dubious, show that the argument is either weak or invalid, and lastly show that the final conclusion is false.
For example,
Dick: Fred you shouldn't eat any type of food pass 9PM. Because eating pass 9PM can lead to weight gain. So if you don't eat anything after 9PM then you'll lose weight. Also If you gain weight how would you ever get a girlfriend.
How would Fred refute this argument? Well, Fred can counter attack the premises by making it dubious. So Fred could state all the calories that he consumed before 9PM. For example, what if Fred for breakfast ate five donuts, two bagels topped with bacon, egg, and tons of cheese. Then lunch, Fred ate fried chicken with gravy, four slices of pizza, and five McDonald quarter pounder hamburgers. Lastly, for dinner two hours before 9PM Fred ate a 72 OZ steak. Okay, that was an exaggeration of how much a person could eat but that argument does counter attack Dick's argument. So even though Fred does not eat anything after 9PM his overall calorie count would be off the chart and he still will be gaining weight.
The second topic of discussion is to refute indirectly. This refute can be seen as harder than refuting directly because indirect refutes means when you read an argument you can't point out anything is wrong with it directly.
For example, Jim is a very opinionated person. Once he hears something he does not like he will immediately decide it not worth listening to and argue with anyone that opposes his opinion.
To indirectly argue the example we could say, Jim has a hard time being open minded and seeing both sides. He tends to not accept other's opinion because he likes to stick with what he knows. This indirect comment hints that Jim is opinionated but it presents it in a lighter manner and less direct way.
Thanks for reading everyone! :]
Monday, October 3, 2011
Discussion Questions: Week Six
1).Please discuss, in detail, what you learned from reading Chapter 6. Discuss at least 2 things you learned.
In Chapter 6 of the Epstein book I have learned numerous aspect of the spoken language or how people communicate. The first thing I have learned from Chapter 6 is when humans communicate at times we tend to leave out other possibilities that can lead to the same conclusion. For example, If Cindy bikes to work today. Cindy's car broke down again. So Cindy bikes to work. That statement is valid yet, its not a strong argument its a weak argument which uses conditionals. Its valid because it could happen Cindy's car could break down and she'll have to bike to work. Yet, there are other possibilities as well. Such as Cindy wanted to save money so she bikes rather than driving to work. Or she might want to keep her carbon footprint at a minimum so she bikes instead. Or rather Cindy's sister took her car so Cindy's didn't have the car. So all those scenario did not involve Cindy's car being broken. Thanks to chapter 6 I realize that there could be more than one reason why the person is doing what they're doing. Meaning you can't always believe what your friend says about that person. You would have to ask the person directly. Even then that person might be lying. Still, after reading that section I have learn to keep an open mind towards whatever people says because there are always another possibilities. The second thing I have learned from chapter 6 is that when people exaggerated circumstances its called a slippery slope argument. I am not new to this type of argument because I have a mom that tends to exaggerate many life scenarios to scare me. But it was good to know the name for that type of argument. I'm pretty sure we all have parents that exaggerate some parts of a life scenario so you wouldn't make mistakes. For example, when I started going out with boys in ninth grade. I remember my mom sat me down and told me that if I started dating boys at this age I would end up failing all my classes because I wouldn't focus on my school work. Also she adds I would then drop out of high school and end up pregnant and be homeless on the streets. Boy, that was a big slippery slope argument. Actually, it makes me laugh thinking about it now because when I was in ninth grade I actually believed her. But its all good my mom was just trying to protect me. :]
Alright, those are the two things I have learned from chapter 6. Thank you for reading!
In Chapter 6 of the Epstein book I have learned numerous aspect of the spoken language or how people communicate. The first thing I have learned from Chapter 6 is when humans communicate at times we tend to leave out other possibilities that can lead to the same conclusion. For example, If Cindy bikes to work today. Cindy's car broke down again. So Cindy bikes to work. That statement is valid yet, its not a strong argument its a weak argument which uses conditionals. Its valid because it could happen Cindy's car could break down and she'll have to bike to work. Yet, there are other possibilities as well. Such as Cindy wanted to save money so she bikes rather than driving to work. Or she might want to keep her carbon footprint at a minimum so she bikes instead. Or rather Cindy's sister took her car so Cindy's didn't have the car. So all those scenario did not involve Cindy's car being broken. Thanks to chapter 6 I realize that there could be more than one reason why the person is doing what they're doing. Meaning you can't always believe what your friend says about that person. You would have to ask the person directly. Even then that person might be lying. Still, after reading that section I have learn to keep an open mind towards whatever people says because there are always another possibilities. The second thing I have learned from chapter 6 is that when people exaggerated circumstances its called a slippery slope argument. I am not new to this type of argument because I have a mom that tends to exaggerate many life scenarios to scare me. But it was good to know the name for that type of argument. I'm pretty sure we all have parents that exaggerate some parts of a life scenario so you wouldn't make mistakes. For example, when I started going out with boys in ninth grade. I remember my mom sat me down and told me that if I started dating boys at this age I would end up failing all my classes because I wouldn't focus on my school work. Also she adds I would then drop out of high school and end up pregnant and be homeless on the streets. Boy, that was a big slippery slope argument. Actually, it makes me laugh thinking about it now because when I was in ninth grade I actually believed her. But its all good my mom was just trying to protect me. :]
Alright, those are the two things I have learned from chapter 6. Thank you for reading!
Saturday, October 1, 2011
Discussion Questions: Week Five
3). Pick one concept from the assigned reading this week, not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.
I will be discussing a section from the Epstein Critical Thinking book. I will be discussing mistaking the person for the claim in chapter 5. Alright, there are always times when anyone including me is guilty of this mistake. As people we tend to judge people right when we see them first. So for my example for my freshmen spring semester I took a macroeconomics class. The first day of class my professor shocked me with his accent. When he lectured the class not only was it long and boring and most importantly it was not understandable due to his heavy accent. So the first day of class I sat there dozing off. Since it was only the beginning of the course there wasn't much difficulty with the assignments he assigned so I was doing alright. But as the semester became more intense I started getting confuse regarding the homework he assigned. So finally I decided to see him during office hours. He went over the material with me slowly and ensure I understood what the question was asking and how I should approach the problem. In the end, I realize how wrong I was about the economics professor. Even though he had a heavy accent that didn't mean he didn't understand the material that he was teaching. In fact, after I realized that, that was when I started paying attention and listening. Overall, the economics class in the end wasn't so bad. I learn that sometimes you can't always judge how a person is just by first looks.
Thank you for reading! :]
I will be discussing a section from the Epstein Critical Thinking book. I will be discussing mistaking the person for the claim in chapter 5. Alright, there are always times when anyone including me is guilty of this mistake. As people we tend to judge people right when we see them first. So for my example for my freshmen spring semester I took a macroeconomics class. The first day of class my professor shocked me with his accent. When he lectured the class not only was it long and boring and most importantly it was not understandable due to his heavy accent. So the first day of class I sat there dozing off. Since it was only the beginning of the course there wasn't much difficulty with the assignments he assigned so I was doing alright. But as the semester became more intense I started getting confuse regarding the homework he assigned. So finally I decided to see him during office hours. He went over the material with me slowly and ensure I understood what the question was asking and how I should approach the problem. In the end, I realize how wrong I was about the economics professor. Even though he had a heavy accent that didn't mean he didn't understand the material that he was teaching. In fact, after I realized that, that was when I started paying attention and listening. Overall, the economics class in the end wasn't so bad. I learn that sometimes you can't always judge how a person is just by first looks.
Thank you for reading! :]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)