Too Much Emotion

In chapter ten, the too much emotion chapter, I found that the appeal to spite was an interesting topic. I found that an appeal to spite is the hope of getting revenge and is rejected as bad by some people on moral grounds. I thought it was funny how it evokes the two wrongs make a right saying as well. A perfect example of an appeal to spite would be if a friend asked you to help out with something, and another friend reminds you that the other friend never really helps you out anymore with anything. People's ability to play off of emotions is very convenient for those who need to persuade others in a short amount of time. The appeal to spite is one of the most commonly known ways to advertise next to appeal to pity and appeal to fear. Most writers see this very clearly which is why they use it in the first place.

Variation in the Population

Variation in the population was one of the topics in chapter fourteen of the Epstein book that I found to be rather intriguing. Different kinds of variation depends on the size of the sample and the random sampling that is taken from the given sample size. If there is a small sample then the variation will be minimal, whereas if the sample is very large then the sample will have a demanding amount of variation. In the event of a extremely large sample, random sampling is the better way to go about getting a good representative sample of the population. An example of variation in the population would be if someone said that all new Pc computers with microsoft word will have the newest up to date version of microsoft word. That's a hasty generalization for it but it is good because all of the newest PC computers are alike and should have the same basic programs.

Good Group Members/Good Group

Of all the topics discussed throughout the semester, I've found that in the book The Essential Guide to Group Communication by Dan O' Hair and Mary O. Wiemann, chapter two Participating in Small Group Communication was the most interesting. I especially liked the part where the book talked about what makes a good group member, where it discussed the “key competencies for individual success in group work” (O' Hair & Wiemann, 10). These key competencies include applying critical thinking, making use of attributions, monitoring perceptions, and overcoming communication apprehension. I agree with the book on all of these competencies because they help to make a group work better together if every member follows these simple key items. I also thought that the section on what makes a good group was just as helpful as the section on what makes a good group member because now the whole group can follow a set of rules together as well as individually.

Cause and Effect

During the reading for this week's discussion I found that the section on criteria for cause and effect was very interesting. Epstein states that there are certain criteria to go by when using cause and effect with claims.

The cause happened (The claim describing it is true.)
The effect happened (The claim describing it is true.)
The cause precedes the effect it is (nearly) impossible for the cause to happen (be true) and the effect not to happen (be false), given the normal conditions.
The cause makes a difference-if the cause had not happened (been true) the effect would not have happened (been true).
There is no common cause.

I feel that this criteria really helps someone out if they are confused as to how to use it when making a claim, and yet on the other hand it could be quite confusing to others. I think that if people took the time to really think about the criteria it would really help. Without this criteria I think I would have had more trouble understanding how to use cause and effect with claims.

Appeal to Emotion: Fear

Out of all the appeals to emotion I found that appealing to fear was the most interesting. I found that mostly politicians and advertisers use this type of appeal to manipulate people into buying the proposed product or to vote a certain way. Also it is used in everyday life such as driving and in making other critical life decisions.

An example of an appeal to emotion would be like Someone telling someone they should not drive fast in the snow or bad weather. The other person might ask why not but then the first person just has to throw in the other person's life. The second person then starts taking in and thinking of the damage it could cause if they crashed or something else serious had happened. This is a good argument because the first person uses the appeal to emotion in a good and appropriate way so that the second person is not scared into making a bad decision.

Navy Seals=Patriotism

We see an appeal to patriotism on a daily basis, from the marine corp advertisements on the television, to the old fashioned “I want you!” advertisements with Uncle Sam pointing down at the unsuspecting boy/girl. The most appealing advertisements to society in the present years have been the marine corp, army, and navy commercials and advertisements in magazines. An example of this ever so loving appeal to patriotism would be this:

Your watching television and it goes to commercial time. The screen becomes dark, with different shades of black and blue. You see the moon shining brightly and hear and see waves gently crashing into the shore of a beach. Everything seems so serene and calm as clouds slowly move across the moon. The screen becomes completely black for a couple seconds and the the sight of the ocean and the moon come back into view, only now there are footprints in the wet sand. The water comes up and washes the footprints away as if no one was even there and the website for the navy seals is displayed in the middle of the screen as the commercial comes to a close.

The underlying argument is that if you become a navy seal, you will become as stealthy and quiet as they men were in the commercial. This happens to be a very good argument (even though it wasn't said) because of the impact it has on the American heart. This advertisement especially appeals to younger boys and men in high school because they are still figuring out what they want to do and are always wanting to show their “tough side”.

Project #2

I found that the second project was much better than the first project. I say this because I liked how we had to analyze an organization (popular or not), and then use what we have been learning and apply it to real life. I thought it was interesting how each site had at least a fallacy or some type of reasoning being used on the site. It is funny how sites use these tools willingly and acknowledgeable. Also it was interesting to see how each type of technique was used by each company. Many companies seemed to use pathos (the emotional appeal) to draw in their audiences. Also it was interesting to see that the companies used these things in their own documents (which some were sent into the government). All in all I enjoyed doing this research project more than the first one because of the reasons mentioned above.

General Claims and their Contradictories

In the section on general claims and their contradictories, I found that the outline given in the book helped me to come up with contradictories more easily. The outline is simple and easy to use because all you need is your claim and then two possible contradictories. Depending on what your claim is, you can have up to two contradictories for it.

For example, Dick can run fast. The contradictory to Dick can run fast is that Dick can sometimes run fast or Dick is not very fast. Another example is sometimes Dick can run fast, the contradictory for sometimes Dick can run fast is Dick cannot run fast. Sometimes people get their contradictories mixed up, which is why the outline is the book is given. The outline is only a “rough guide” but it can at least get you started on your way to a good claim and its contradictory.

Some Valid and Invalid Forms

I found that the section about some valid and invalid forms of argument was very interesting. The section discussed the direct way of reasoning with all (All S are P, a is S, so a is P.), arguing backwards with all (All S are P, a is P, So a is S.), and a couple others. It helped me to see even more how wee use diagrams to make things even more clear than we originally plan to make them. Also this section helped me realize that if you truly have trouble figuring out if the argument is valid or invalid you can always draw a diagram, but the diagram might be tricky if you do not know how to properly draw one. This section made setting up a diagram easy by giving guidelines. The guidelines on checking for validity with diagrams made it easy because it gave useful tips on what should go in the bubbles/boxes, what each one needed to have in it, and where it should be placed (overlapping, next to each other, etc.). From personal experience, if I cannot understand something or have trouble deciding whether something is valid or not, I found drawing the diagram helps tremendously. I remember using one to help me narrow down what colleges I wanted to look at and which ones were right for me.

Advertising

The advertisement I found was for a Coca-Cola ad. It is a vintage ad with a couple as the center of attention. The background is a soft pink, with hearts and swirls floating around the couple. This picture is coming out of the Coca-Cola bottle held by a hand with no body or face attached to it. The claim being brought forward by Coca-Cola is that if you drink Coca-Cola then you will find love, or if you're already drinking it then your love will mean more and be better than before. According to Epstein in chapter five section a, there are three choices a person can make about whether to believe a claim or not. Those three choices are:
1)Accept the claim is true.
2)Reject the claim.
3)Suspend judgement.

Now I could chose one right now but after further reading in Epstein's book, there are more criteria for using these three options. Epstein states that “there are no absolute rules for when to accept, when to reject, and when to suspend judgment about a claim” (84). Although there are no rules, Epstein gives the reader guidelines to making a better judgment. A person can use personal experience, can accept a claim made by someone we know and trust who is an authority on this kind of claim, can accept a claim made by a reputable authority whom we can trust as an expert on this kind of claim and who has no motive to mislead, can accept a claim in a reputable journal or reference source, and one can accept a claim in a media outlet that's usually reliable.

Since I have personal experience drinking Coca-Cola, I will use my own experience to determine whether or not to believe this ad. I have drank Coca-Cola when I have been in a relationship and when I have not been in a relationship. In both cases the claim that Coca-Cola makes is not true because it did not make my love life better and it did not find me love. Therefore I choose not to believe the claim that Coca-Cola is saying by printing this ad.

Here is the link to view the picture. I found it on google images so just type in coca-cola ads if you cannot see it, the picture is within the first couple pages.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3118/2803757869_7f235e6d54.jpg

The Principle of Rational Discussion

The Principle of Rational Discussion was one thing that really interested me in the readings. I found it interesting how that there were even principles of rational discussion. There are three principles that one assumes when having a rational discussion. These three principles are:

1. Knows about the subject under discussion.
2. Is able and willing to reason well.
3. Is not lying.

Under condition number one, if a person has no idea about the subject, then there is no basis for arguing. Arguing would be useless because possibly only one person would know about the subject at hand and therefor could tell if the other person did not know anything.

Under condition number two, sometimes a person intentionally has no intent to reason well or sometimes the person is not even able to because they lack information of the subject or some other reason. This ties back with condition number one because if they person is unable to reason well then it could be due to condition number one.

Under condition number three, if a person continues to lie throughout the discussion then there is no point in reasoning with that person unless it is to catch them up in the lie.

Repairing An Argument

Repairing Arguments has three guidelines one should follow in order to make an argument better. The guidelines are as follows:

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

Example:
Many foods contain artificial and natural sugars, making it bad for the human body to consume mass quantities of sugar. People die from diabetes every year.

In order to fix this argument all that is needed is to add a premise that is plausible and would seem plausible to the other person. By saying that people with diabetes have to watch their sugar levels so it is not a good idea to have them eat mass quantities of sugar all the time. This premise would connect the argument to the conclusion, therefore repairing the argument and making it a better argument than before.

Example #5

Example number one, 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 values(5).

Argument: Yes this is an argument.

Conclusion: The neighbor should be forced to get rid of all his unused cars because they are decreasing property values.

Additional premises needed: No additional premises are required for the argument.

Identify any sub argument: There happens to be no sub argument for this argument.

Good argument: Yes, I believe the argument is good because the premise are true, and the conclusion is true.

I believe this exercise helped because it helped me to understand what parts to look for when an argument is presented. Also it helped to identify each part of the argument.

Rational Discussion

The Principle of Rational Discussion as stated by Epstein says that"sometimes it seems the other person doesn't understand what's involved in rational discussion or is intending to mislead. And sometimes there's not even an argument." What Epstein means by that is sometimes when a person comes into an argument or presents one other with an argument, they may not always know enough information about the topic or is intending to give false information. There are four main ways to tell if the person is violating the principle of rational discussion; they are begging the question, using strawman, shifting the burden of truth, and/or using relevance. The most common method being used in the violation of rational discussion that I have noticed is either strawman or shifting the burden of truth. People who sometimes argue about football or any kind of sports mostly use shifting the burden of truth. People find it easier to let someone else tell them why it the argument is true or false because they either cannot think of a truth or false statement about the argument or they're just too lazy to find one.

Example- My friend came up to me and told me that Italy's national soccer team was going to be horrible this year when they come to play for the world cup. I asked him why they would and he just kept saying that they had sucked last year(even though they won) and they were gonna suck this year. He also kept saying that they had no real hood players. So when I had asked him about it again, he told me to come up with why they were gonna do good this year.

Sexual Harassment Or Not??

Sexual harassment is an "unwelcome and unsolicited behavior of a sexual nature" according to Hair and Wiemann. Many people mistake certain looks or acts of kindness for a possible advancement in a sexual way. The differences in how we interpret each others actions and ways of speaking are sometimes mistaken for advances as well, when in reality it could mean the exact opposite. Attraction is another reason that sexual harassment occurs. If someone of certain power is attracted to another person, that the status or authority of the person with certain power abuses it to gain sexual favors. The abuse of power can go on for as long as someone lets it, although people are afraid of saying something because of the person's power and or status. Sexual harassment usually goes over looked due to the fact the the victim does not want to confront their "attacker", instead the victim either changes companies, work areas, or jobs.

Strong Versus Valid

Epstein states that a good argument can either be strong or valid. He says that an argument can be both strong and valid but the argument may beg the question if one tries to use both. Epstein states that "a strong argument with true premises is sometimes better than a valid one with the same question" (48). I believe this to be true because the way each one is presented can mean the same thing but end up being different. An everyday life example of a valid argument would be that San Jose city does daily street cleaning. Therefore, all the streets in San Jose are clean. An example of a strong argument would be that Scott visited San Jose. He had never visited San Jose before and really liked it. Scott really likes San Jose.

Group Communication

In the Essential Guide to Group Communication by Dan O'Hair & Mary O. Wiemann, I found that the part about dealing with time pressures in groups was very interesting. As a hall government member, I see more than my share of wasted time. I found it interesting how the book gives specific leadership styles is dependent on time. I noticed that if more time is used in questioning each other within the group and each group member challenges the other, then more will get done. This is due to the fact that once an idea is challenged and all other alternatives have been brought up, then if the idea is still standing, it should be the one to run its course. Three possible possible ways that groups can do to work around time and produce a quality decision are 1)”a group may begin a discussion by taking a nonbinding poll, 2) the leader may impose time limits on certain components of a discussion, and 3) the group may not make any decision at all” (Wiemann, 45). I found it very interesting that the last way to produce a quality decision was to not come up with one at all. I guess no decision is better than a bad one.

An Argument: Good or Bad?

There are many everyday examples of of good valid argument. One argument could be about shoes for instance. My friend Christine has seven pairs of shoes. There are seven days in a week. Therefore she has a pair of shoes for everyday of the week. This is a good valid argument because both premises are true. Also, both premises eliminate the fact that the conclusion cannot be false. Therefore this is a valid argument.

My friend Alex does not study for his final exams and does horrible. The final exams are based on the readings in the book. Therefore due to Alex not studying, he fails his final exams. This is a good valid argument because both premises are plausible and are more plausible than the conclusion. Also, both premises eliminate the thought the conclusion is not false. Therefore this is also a good argument.

More About Claims

In the book Critical Thinking by Richard Epstein, Epstein discusses prescriptive claims and value judgments. He states that a "claim is descriptive if it says what is. A claim is prescriptive if it says what should be" (Epstein, 24). What he means by a descriptive claim is that when someone states something like they are hot or that Obama is the United States first African American president, then the subject that is being said is something that is usually a fact. When Epstein discusses a prescriptive claim it is something like Obama should reform health care or if someone is hot then they should go swimming.

As part of the prescriptive claim, there are words that make the claim more effective. Words such as bad, wrong, worse, good, better, and best are words that help with the claim to make us feel that we should or should not do something. This is what makes the prescriptive claim more of a moral claim or value judgment. Sometimes though, the moral claim or value judgment is too vague to be a claim. Someone could state something that is non debatable or the standard could be personal.

Vague/Ambiguous Sentence

Vague sentences are something that we use in everyday conversations without even realizing it. Just the other day I heard one of my friends tell me that he was very tired and worn out from the day. He did not mention what exactly exhausted him or what he did that was so strenuous, which makes his sentence vague. Another example of a vague sentence would be an advertisement I saw on television. The television ad I saw was about a depression pill that could help with depression. The ad stated that if depression was a problem in your life it could help. This ad is vague because it did not state how the medicine could help but rather just stated facts about depression and other things about the side affects of the medication. The ad would not have been vague if the company who made the ad/the medicine would have said how it could help treat one's depression problem.

Subjective and Objective Claims

Subjective claims are more along the lines of personal feelings and ideas. If someone believes or feels that what they say is true or even false then it is a subjective claim. A good example of a subjective claim would be my friend saying that the New Orleans Saints are better than the Indianapolis Colts. Now because he said this and it is not a fact, his statement becomes a subjective claim.

Objective claims are more along the lines of impersonal, meaning it has more to do with fact. If someone says something and it is factual then it makes the claim objective. An example of a objective claim is that my dog Marlon, he is a Maltese and does not shed a great amount of hair. This is objective because my dog is in fact a Maltese and when someone looks into dogs that do not shed, Maltese come up on the list.

A Little About Me

Hello everyone!
My name is Bubba and I am a freshman here at San Jose State. I am majoring in Biology with an emphasis in teaching in high school, and I later plan on taking the masters course for high school counseling. I've had tons of experience with communication because we all do it on a daily basis anyways =] To better my communication skills I became vice president for a club in high school and it helped immensely. Also I am the vice president of hall government in the CVC classic dorms in campus village. I hope to further improve on my communication not only face to face but over the internet as well. As far as online classes go, this is my first time taking one and I'm very excited about it! =] As I was reading the netiquette I became very interested with the whole idea of netiquette. It amazed me how many things you could do wrong without even knowing it! Well I hope you guys are just as excited about this class as I am =]

-Bubba