Discussion Questions: Week Four

2). Violating the Principle of Rational Discussion (page 202) and Content Fallacies (page 201). Pick one, explain the fallacy in your own words, then give a real world example that you have heard in the past. (You may need to do additional 'research' for the fallacy that you have chosen if the concept is not clear from the text. You can 'google' the particular fallacy you have chosen for an additional explanation).

.... Content Fallacies ....

There are numerous reasons on how an argument can contain content fallacies. I have chosen to discuss Bad Appeal to Authority. Bad appeal to authority is mainly when an argument is supported by an expert's testimony from their field of expertise. Yet, not all testimonies from the expert can always be true. The expert might have a bias opinion about a certain issue thus the counter argument will be left out of discussion. Also, bad appeal to authority, can be seen everywhere in our daily lives. If we just open our eyes and critically analysis the advertisements that surround us or what our friends' say when they recommend to us a certain eat out place. Can we trust what these people are saying? 


First, as I was driving down a highway there was an advertisement that contained a smiling person wearing a white lab coat, automatically, I assumed that he was a doctor with a PhD in medicine just because he was wearing the coat. He's claiming how a small pill can help an individual lose 20 pounds in the first week. If the individual consistently takes that pill each week after the first they will lose 5 pounds. The advertisement was definitely an Appeal to Authority. The people passing by in their cars would not know if the smiling person was a real doctor or maybe he was just playing dress up. But since he had on the white lab coat we assume he's a doctor. We tend to believe doctors. That's why we take the medicines they prescribe to us when we are sick. That is also why so many advertisements contain doctors boasting products for the public. 


Second, when my friends declare the best sushi joint around the bay was on the outskirts of San Francisco. Since, I haven't been to that restaurant before that automatically makes them my experts. So I would ask what food I should order when I am there and what I should not order. Yet, again that is a bad appeal to authority. What if my friends' taste preferences are different from mines. What they order maybe too spicy or too sour for me. Or what if my friends regard sushi as only California Rolls and nothing else. For me, personally, I like raw fish or sashimi on my sushi. Therefore, I would not consider that restaurant a good sushi joint if they are only good for California Rolls. That's why word of mouth is a great way to attract people to businesses such as restaurants, small eat outs, clothing stores, food markets, and etc. If your friends tells you that a restaurant is good why wouldn't you trust them. They are your friends after all.




Alright, second post of the week. Done. [: 

Discussion Questions: Week Four

1). Concerning 221 - 225 Complex Arguments for Analysis: Page 225 contains Exercises on the Structure of Arguments. Please choose one of the 5 exercises and complete the exercise in one post to your blog. After you have completed the exercise, discuss whether or not this exercise was useful.


Exercise on the Structure of Arguments:
1. My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the cars in his yard. (1) People do not like living next door to such a mess. (2) He never drives any of them. (3) They all look old and beat up and leak oil all over the place. (4) It is bad for the neighborhood, and it will decrease property value. (5)


Argument? (Yes or No): Yes, claims 2, 3,4,5


Conclusion: My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the cars in his yard. (1)


Additional premises needed?: Yes. The neighbor's mass collection of cars are leaking oil it should be consider not environmental friendly. (a) If the neighbor's mass collection of cars are violating environmental laws he will be forced to pay fees and fines for his consistent ignorance. (b)


Identify any subargument: Yes, claims 2,3,4 will support claim 5. Therefore claim 5 will support the conclusion claim 1.


Good argument?: Yes, its a valid argument with plausible premises. It could be however stronger with more details and added sentences. 


This exercise actually made me think harder about this argument. Truthfully, I never thought of arguments in such a precise manner. So yes, this outline definitely helped me not only by organizing my thoughts in defining what an argument is but also helped me realize how complex an argument is. 




Alright, thanks for reading my post! :] 
                                                  

Discussion Questions: Week Three

3.) Pick one concept from either text, not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.


The concept I will be discussing is from The Essential Guide to Group Communication by Dan O'Hair and Mary O. Wiemann. The concept I found interesting is Authoritarian Leadership. The book defines Authoritarian Leadership when one person leads and makes decision for the overall group with out discussing it with any one from the group. In the end, it states how Authoritarian Leadership affects the group that is following the direction of the leader, tend to be unhappy and does not feel connected to the group. I believe the Authoritarian Leadership does not work most of the time. Mostly, these day companies want to hire people that are team oriented not ones that are always off being solo or giving commands. Companies want to present groups a situation and hopefully as a group they will eventually solve the problem. For my personal experience, I was working at a restaurant where a manager told everyone what to do without asking if they prefer that or that. There was no group discussion, of course I did not feel connected to the place or the people there. Therefore, quitting was not hard because I did not know anyone there. They were just employees nothing more. 


Alright, thank you for reading my post! Last one of the week! :] YAY!

Discussion Questions: Week Three

2.) Discuss Strong versus Valid Arguments in detail. Give an example of each from everyday life.

Strong Argument vs. Valid Argument
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Validity of an argument is based upon if a statement is true then the conclusion must be true those making an argument valid.

Example: All Yogurtland employees must wear uniform before starting their shifts. Ellene is a Yogurtland employee. Therefore Ellene must wear Yogurtland uniform before her shift starts.


This argument is valid because its true that all Yogurtland employees must wear uniform. There is no doubt about the first sentence. Since Ellene is a Yogurtland employee she would have to wear uniform before working. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Strong argument is very different from a valid argument. Since valid argument do not need to be strong rather it just needs to be true. 


Example: Roughly 70% of Americans drive cars. Sam is an American. Therefore, Sam drives a car.


To determine if the argument is either weak or strong we do not care if the premises (the first sentence) is true or not. This argument can be seen as a strong argument because roughly 70% of Americans drive cars. The 70% is in the high percentage scale so since Sam is an American; there is a high possibility that Sam drives a car. Those making this argument strong.  

Discussion Questions: Week Three

Discussion Questions #1
1). Concerning part "C" in chapter 3 of the Epstein text, The Tests for an Argument to Be Good - there are three tests an argument must pass in order for the argument to be good...In addition, it is imperative that you understand the concepts contained within the 3 tests for an argument (page 42). (Perez, Comm 41).


Part "C" of Chapter 3 gives us the criteria for an Argument to Be Good. Here I will attempt to display my understanding of the criteria.


Example: 
Jenny (to her desk neighbor): Sarah is late again. She has been late for class five times this week. She is not a punctual person. 


             Analysis: The premises of the argument is not plausible. First, each person determines "late" in different ways. So, the "late" term that is used is too vague to comprehend. Sarah might regard "late" as after the teacher takes roll. And Jenny might regard "late" as after the bell rings for class. Second, the conclusion is false, what if Sarah is five minutes before the bell rings for her other classes and just the first class she is not five minutes before the bell rings. So concluding someone is not punctual without seeking other evidence further supporting the unpunctual conclusion would make the conclusion false in this argument. Finally, after I have analyzed this argument I could happily say this argument, in fact, is not valid because there are too many holes and ambiguity in her claim.


Alright, thank you for reading my post!  :]

Discussion Questions

Discussion Question #3
3). Pick one concept from the reading (either Epstein or the Small Group Comm book) and discuss it in detail. (Perez, Comm 41)


Concept:
I am picking a concept from The Essential Guide to Group Communication by Dan O'Hair and Mary O. Wiemann. The concept I decided to discuss about is the term "self managing teams" which is the last term of chapter 2 that was discussed in the book. A "self-managing team" is a group of employees that has the ability to work efficiently such as plan and manage their day to day activities and duties with little to no supervision necessary. 


Example: 
As I read about the "self-managing team" concept from the book I became aware that the place where I work consists a "self-managing team". The reason is that the owners of Yogurtland are usually not around and there isn't a manager on premises, so mainly all the employees are scattered around doing what is necessarily and there is only one shift leader. The shift leader is also doing the same job as the team members. The only time the team members need the shift leader is when the team members need money for the register. Mainly the team members are expected to know when they aren't at the register they have to either clean, wipe tables or machines, refill toppings, sweep floors, or throw garbage away. Those actions are suppose to be done automatically with no one else asking of them. Additionally, we each get to decide when our breaks are and plan accordingly. The reason why I say we have to plan accordingly is that there is always a certain time where tons of customers show up and we can not be short handed of a person when the rush hour starts. Moreover, personally, being part of a self-managing team I believe is way better than being in a team where I do not have a say and when someone else in a higher position, the manager, gets to decide when I'm allowed to take breaks or consistently tells me what to do. I like being a person not a robot. Besides, if you have worked at a place for at least a year you already know what's expected. 


Yay, last post of the week! Wooots! :] Thanks for reading! Have a great Labor Day weekend everyone!! 

Discussion Questions

Discussion Question #2
2). Use an example from everyday life: Describe a vague sentence or ambiguous sentence you have heard recently. Where did you hear this sentence? An advertisement? Was it a conversation with a friend? What qualified the sentence as vague or ambiguous? (Perez, Comm 41).


Qualification:
Vague or Ambiguous - when a sentence or statement stated is not precise enough which can lead the listener to interpreted the statement in many other ways not just one way 


Example of a vague sentence:
Once I realized what vague or ambiguous sentences are. I became aware of all the vagueness people use in their everyday conversations. So yesterday (Wednesday, August 31st) I had a closing shift from 3 PM to 11 PM at Yogurtland. Before we were able to close the store we had to complete all the closing duties such as mopping, sweeping, cleaning the machines, and etc. So we had to start about an hour before the store close or else we will be there til midnight closing the store. As I was cleaning the tables I asked one of my teammates at the register what's the time. She responded by saying almost 9 o'clock. I did not understand what she meant. Does she mean 5 minutes before 9 o'clock or 15 minutes before 9 o'clock or maybe 30 minutes? So I asked her to clarify for me. She replied its 8:55. Now I know the exact time and how many minutes are left before I can begin closing the store.  


Alright, thanks for reading my blog! Hopefully this post is clearer than my previous one and not ambiguous or vague. :]