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! :] 

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! :]

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!

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! :]

Discussion Questions: Week Five

2). Concerning Section C in Chapter 5, Advertising on the Internet. Please find a piece of advertising on the internet, provide a link on your blog, a screenshot, or include the advertisement in your post so the class can see what you are discussing. You should then relate the piece of advertising back to the concepts in Sections A & B in chapter 5 and discuss.

Alright, for this post I will be using an advertisement from one of my favorite perfumes. This advertisement is from Dolce Gabbana's famous perfume "Light Blue". This advertisement shows a beautiful female laying on a rubber boat relaxing and enjoying the waters. To relate this back to chapter 5 section A, we must first evaluate the premise. So for me, while looking at this advertisement I could say the argument the advertisers are trying to convey is that once you spray on the Dolce Gabbana's Light Blue perfume you will feel like you are relaxing in a beautiful ocean. Also once you use it you will become a super model just like the lady in this advertisement. Obviously, that is incorrect, also relating to chapter 5's section B I used my personal experience to determine if I should accept or reject the claim. From my personal experience, when I used the perfume I did not feel like I was in a boat relaxing with the ocean breeze blowing through my hair. I will admit I did feel more confident but not as confident as wearing what the lady is wearing in this advertisement. Also I really enjoy the smell but I don't think this scent relates to an "ocean scenery". The scent actually reminded me of apples and trees rather than the ocean. But it did send me to a happy place. So in the end, I would reject the claim of the advertisement that a happy place is actually in the middle of the ocean. Since I can not swim I would not say that is my happy place. I believe the advertiser should consider other people's happy places. 


thank you for reading! :] 

Discussion Questions: Week Five

1). In our last discussion week we talked about Violating the Principle of Rational Discussion (page 202) and Content Fallacies (page 201). This week I would like you to discuss the idea of repairing arguments. For this question, please come up with an argument that needs to be repaired. Look over the examples on pages 63-67. Come up with your own example and 'discuss' it as they do in the text. To accomplish this, you should understand the Principle of Rational Discussion and the concept of Repairing Arguments. 


example: Matt is an auto mechanic. He has been an auto mechanic for 20 years. Therefore, I would definitely trust his expertise regarding my car repairs. 


First for this claim we will have to assume certain sentences are true. The first sentence that states, Matt is an auto mechanic is assumed true. Then the second sentence that we must assume true which is he has been a mechanic for 20 years. Also we have to assume that the person arguing this claim understands the subject under discussion, and is able and willing to reason well, and is not lying. After all the assumptions there is a missing premise that would be needed to glue everything true. We could add, "Any auto mechanic with experience of 10 years or more is well experienced." This extra add on will make the claim stronger and the add on increases the validness of the claim. Since Matt has been a mechanic for 20 years he does know a lot about cars. Therefore, any comments Matt says should be regarded as true (as long as he's not lying). So this extra add on or premises has repaired this argument to a stronger and still valid argument. 




Thank you for reading! :]

Discussion Questions: Week Four

3). Pick one concept from the reading (either Epstein or the Small Group Comm book) and discuss it in detail.


I have decided to choose a reading from Small Group Communication Book by Dan O'Hair and Mary O. Wiemann. I would like to discuss the "use of communication channels." There are two different channels  in companies. The first one is formal channels where communication pathways must go through different managements or departments before reaching to the bosses (if it even gets that far ). This channel of communication is seen in many companies. I remember calling AT&T about my internet bill because the bill was addressed to Jenny not Ellene. I do not know how the operator misheard my name but on the billing statement said Jenny. So I first talked to customer services of sales where the operator verify who I was with my Social Security number; since my name was incorrect. Then she asked me what I needed her help with. I told her how the billing statement was incorrect. Then she transferred me to another operator in the AT&T internet service. The operator there again had to verify who I was. After stating what I needed help with. The operator apologized about the the misunderstanding, but then she stated she couldn't help me. This was the wrong department. Again, she transferred me. Now, I believe the operator transferred me to a technician that assist in setting up new accounts for new customers. The technician assisted me with the issue and it was quickly resolved with a few questions and like magic it was done. But honestly, did it have to take nearly 45 minutes calling and being placed on hold just to get to the right department? That is a major flaw in the formal channel of communication. Its a long painful process of hoping the next person you speak to is the right person. It reminds me of a shooting game either you hit or miss.


Last post! Yay! Have a great weekend! :]