Generalizing

There were many interesting concepts in chapter 14. I think there are many useful tools in generalizing that can be used in reasoning. Generalizations are arguments. In the book, "Critical Thinking" by Richard L. Epstein, he discusses whether generalization in an argument is good. As Epstein defines, generalizing is if we conclude about a group, the population, from a claim about some part of it, the sample. Epstein explains that sometimes the general claim is the conclusion is called generalization. To see whether it is an argument and if the generalization is good, it should consist of a strong argument with plausible premises. There are three premises needed for a good generalization. The three premises consist of having the sample representative, the sample big enough and the sample studied well. I think that all of the previous chapters we have learned about all applies to generalizing arguments. It helps evaluate and analyze arguments.

Blankcanvas

Favorites

There are many favorites about the class. I like about our Critical thinking and decision making class. My first favorite thing about the class was the fact that I was able to learn concepts and use it towards other classes. It improved my communication skills and reasoning which helped me a lot in school, at home and in a professional environment. Having a bad first online experience, our online class has changed my perspective on online classes. I like how quick our professor emailed back with replies. My least favorite things about the class was how it was a bit difficult to balance out group schedule meetings with everyone having such different availability times. I also did not like how on the online test, we were unable to go back and see which answers we got incorrect to learn from our mistakes. Another least favorite thing about the class was the 12 hour gap for posting blogs. I think the class can improve by allowing students to blog freely. Overall, the class was great and very effective!

Blankcanvas

What I learned in Comm 41

I was a bit skeptical about what I would learn enrolling in Communication, Critical Thinking and Decision Making, because I was unsure if what I learn was going to be useful, but by the end of the semester, I not only learned many new concepts, but also improved many skills as well. I learned how to improve critical thinking by learning how to identify if an argument is valid, strong, invalid, bad, if it needed to be repaired and how the premise play a important role in an argument. I also learned the different kinds of fallacies in an argument and how it may effect an argument. One section I learned about most was evaluating premises. An argument must pass to be good if there is good reason to believe the premises, the premises are plausible than the conclusion and if the argument is strong or valid. Critical thinking and decision making helped me improved communication skills, critical thinking and reasoning and are useful tools I can use towards my major.

Blankcanvas

The Normal Conditions

There were many interesting concepts on cause and effects on chapter 15. In the book, "Critical thinking" by Richard L. Epstein, he discusses the cause and effects in an argument. In section A2, Epstein describes the normal conditions in an argument. As Epstein defines, Normal conditions is, for a casual claim, the normal conditions are the obvious and plausible unstated claims that are needed to establish that the relationship between purported cause and purported effect is either valid or strong. I think learning and knowing about normal conditions is a very useful tool because it is easy to evaluate an argument. Epstein provides an example and explains that the argument can continue because we assume what "normally" can occur. The chapter also provides the criteria for cause and effects which may be very helpful as well. I think there were many interesting and useful tools in chapter 15 like all the other chapters in Epstein's book.

Blankcanvas

Mission Critical

There were many useful tool on the Mission Critical web page. There are many sections of links that were interesting that students can learn from. The main menu provides a large variety of sections starting with Parts of arguments, Basic relations, analysis of arguments, Fallacies and Non-Rational Persuasion and Other common fallacies. Each section provides statements, definitions, quizzes, and exercises to help students understand the different reasoning in an argument. The web page provides what distinguishes claims and how to evaluate a reason. I think all of the definitions, examples, exercises, and quizzes are very useful because it is a teaching tool for students to learn the different reasons in an argument. The exercises provides if the answer students select in the exercises and quizzes are correct or incorrect which can be a very useful tool in trying to learn fallacious appeals, conjunctions, causal argument, deductive reasoning and many more.


Blankcanvas

Cause and Effect

The Causal Arguments web page provided many useful tools that can be use in an argument. The Introduction to Casual Arguments provided a scenario of inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning is a reasoning from a case and generalized by observation. The scenario creates an argument between a bicyclist, illegally parked truck and two oncoming drivers. It states that although seems to fit the pattern of an inductive argument, it actually is an inductive argument. There were only one different and it all depended on the incident before. The web page also provides the what thee factors a casual argument relies on; one, how to accept or demonstrate the implied comparison, two, how likely the case for causation seems to be, and three, how to credible the 'only significant difference' or 'only significant commonality' claim is. I think the information provided on the web page can help how to analyze and evaluate an argument.


Blankcanvas

Judging Analogies

Chapter 12, Reasoning by Analogy, was very interesting. In the book, "Critical Thinking" by Richard L. Epstein, he provides more examples and definitions on how to reason in an argument. He also discusses techniques of how to identify and judge an analogy. Epstein explains in his examples that an analogy of an argument to another can be a great way to refute an argument and that just saying that one side of the analogy in an argument is like the other is too vague to be stated and used as the premise in an argument. Epstein provides a list of questions to ask when evaluating an analogy.

•  Is it an argument and does it have a conclusion?
• What is the comparison in the argument?
• What are the premises?
• What are the similarities in comparison to both sides?
• Can we state the similarities as premises and find a general principle?
• Does the general principle really apply to both sides? Does it make a difference?
• Is the argument strong or valid? Is it good?

I think by providing these questions, Epstein made it a very useful tool because he makes it easier to identity an analogy in an argument.


Blankcanvas

Explained reasoning

From the list of reasoning provided, there were a couple reasoning that were a bit difficult to understand. The one reasoning I found that was most difficult for me to understand was casual reasoning in an argument. After reviewing more sites on casual reasoning, it made it much clearer to understand. Causal reasoning is a form of inductive reasoning. Casual reasoning should have good reasons to believe that the events in the argument, the cause, relates to other events, the effect. After I grasp the concept of causal reasoning, I realize it was a bit difficult to create an example for the reasoning. The example I came up with was, "Passing all nursing prerequisites with good grades leads to acceptance into the nursing program." The cause is passing all prerequisites with good grades and the effect is the acceptance into the nursing program. The effects follows the cause, but the effects does not cause the cause.

Blankcanvas

Types of Reasoning

There are many types of reasoning in a argument. Some type of reasoning may be reasoning by analogy, sign reasoning, causal reasoning, reasoning by criteria, reasoning by example, inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. Here are examples of each reasoning:


Reasoning by analogy
Manny Pacquiao is a Filipino and Manny Pacquiao boxes.
Ivan is Filipino.
Ivan boxes.

Sign Reasoning
Rachel is not opening her door as I knock loudly, so I guess Rachel is not home.

Causal Reasoning
Passing all nursing prerequisites with good grades leads to acceptance in the nursing program.

Reasoning by Criteria
How would I know if my essay is well developed?
A well developed essay includes examples to support your thesis throughout the conclusion.

Reasoning by Examples  
You should be more social. I met a girl who was too shy and was always alone.
Inductive Reasoning
All of the fire trucks we have seen are red.
All fire trucks are red.


Deductive Reasoning
All girls have monthly periods.
Ronnie is on ther period.
Ronnie is a girl.

Blankcanvas

Too much emotion - Exercise 9

Vote for Senator Wong. He knows how important your concerns are.

I decided to complete exercise 9 from chapter 10 due to this year's election. It's likely to hear arguments stating how a senator or congressman cares about your concerns, then most fail to meet their goals. The argument, "Vote for Senator Wong. He knows how important your concerns are", is an example of a feel-good argument. As Epstein defines, a feel good argument is an argument that appeals to our wanting to feel good about ourselves. In this example, it attempts to make the statement feel good about ourselves and our concerns because "he knows how important your concerns are". The argument tries to imply that Senator Wong cares about your concerns, and if you vote for Senator Wong, he will make an effort to those concerns. Although the statement gives you a feel good message, the argument is bad because the argument is vague. Everyone's concern is a broad the argument is just for voters to feel good about voting for him.

Blankcanvas

Objective 2

Find an advertisement that uses an appeal to fear. Is it a good argument?

Appeal to fear does not necessarily have to be bad. In my example of appeal to fear advertisement, the appeal to fear may be good. An advertisement I heard on radio talks shows recently and has also been advertising on television is Hair Loss products. Rogaine is a product that regrows hair and prevents hair loss. Rogaine's slogan is "Use it or lose it". The advertisement uses appeal to fear by adding, "Hair loss is in your family, but it does not have to, use Rogaine". The implicit in this argument is that, "Because hair loss is in the family history, you should buy Rogaine" It also says to, "Use it or lose it" which implies that if you do not use Rogaine's hair loss product, you will It is a good argument but the argument is implausible.

Blankcanvas

Appeals to Emotion

In the book, "Critical Thinking" by Richard L. Epstein, he discusses the different types of appeals to emotion.  Epstein mentions that emotions do play a role on reasoning in an arguments, but that it does not mean that emotions should not be all in an argument. As Epstein states, An appeal to emotion is a premise said in a certain tone to convince others to believe you feel a certain way. The different types of appeals Epstein mentions are, the appeal to pity, appeal to fear, appeal to spite and appeal to vanity. The appeal that stood out to me most was an argument that call in your debts appeal. Call in your debts is the opposite of spite appeal. This appeal grabbed my interest most because I have encountered situations like it various times. Someone believing you owe them something because they did you a favor. My sisters tend to be this way a lot. For example, "Can you wash my clothes for me since I'm is fixing your car?" She is asking me to do something for her, owing her a favor because she did me a favor.

Blankcanvas

Ambiguous Sentences

In chapter two of the book, "Critical Thinking" by Richard L. Epstein, he discusses the issues of ambiguous sentences in an argument. As Epstein defines, an ambiguous sentence is a sentence that can be understood in two or a very few dubious ways. During our first couple weeks in class, as I came across the section reading about ambiguous sentences, It was easy to understand, but I remember I was having a difficult time stating an example of an ambiguous sentence. The week we were assigned to read chapter two, one of the blogs were to write about a vague or ambiguous sentence, I read the examples of ambiguous sentence over and over, but couldn't come up with an example so decided to blog about vague sentences instead, which was the other choice for that post. I did some web research and came across some very detailed examples that made it very easy to understand. The website provided various examples of ambiguous sentences and provided explanation, here is the link for the website, Ambiguous sentences.

Blankcanvas

Major Course Assignments

Our assignment, Critical Thinking in News and Politics and Critical Thinking and Social Organization both helped me learn how to locate, organize and interpret articles. Completing the assignment Critical Thinking in News and Politics helped me learn how to analyze an article. I broke down each paragraph by making side notes of how I interpreted the article and continued from there. I also learned how to understand and state the major claim. I was able to state its premises and determine whether the argument was strong, valid, weak or bad. With Critical Thinking and Social Organization, I learned how to state what type of reasoning the organization used and identify how the organization used concealed claims. Both Critical Thinking in News and Politics and Critical Thinking and Social Organizations improved my skills in communication. Working in a group was very useful and was very effective when everyone contributed ideas and effort.


Blankcanvas

General Claims

In the book, "Critical thinking" by Richard L. Epstein, he discusses general claims in an argument. As Epstein defines, a general claim is a claim that emphasizes something in a general way about all or a part of a collection. There may be times where an argument seems valid but it is not even if the premises seem to be true. In general claims, there are uses of all, some, no and only. Epstein also discusses the use of contradictory in an argument. Contradictory is a claim that has the opposite truth value. Examples of these claims may be,


Example of general claim
Jessica is single. Jessica has a son. So Jessica is widowed.

The premises are true, but the argument is not valid. The argument sounds good, but is bad. Jessica is single and she may have a son, but Jessica may just be divorced or separated from her Husband.


Example of contradictory
Claim                                                                 Contradictory
 All Asians are bad drivers.                             Some Asian drivers are not bad drivers.

The example has the opposite truth value which makes it a contradictory.

Blankcanvas

Conditionals

I found a couple things interesting in chapter 6. I thought the sections explaining conditionals were interesting. Conditionals in an argument may be a useful tool. In the book "Critical Thinking" by Richard L. Epstein, he discusses the matter of conditionals of an argument. As Epstein defines, a claim is conditional if the claim can be written over using the words "if...then..." The claim requires that it has the same truth-value to it. The antecedent in a rewritten claim "If A, then B" is A, and B is the consequent. Antecedent meaning prior and Consequent meaning following as a result of. Epstein explains that a contradictory of a conditional is, If A, then B has contradictory A but not B. An example may be...

If Ivan drives, Jay get to pick the music.

Conditional: Yes
Antecedent: Ivan drives
Consequent: Jay pick the music
Contradictory: Ivan drives, but Jay does not get to pick the music.

Blankcanvas

Chapter 7: Counter-arguments

I found many parts of Chapter 7, Counter-arguments, that I thought was interesting. I learned various things in chapter 7 that were significant and may be used in arguments. In the book "Critical Thinking" by Richard L. Epstein, he discusses counter-arguments. When students cannot evaluate an argument, they tend to raise the objective in an argument. As Epstein states, raising arguments is a method to show that an argument is bad or weak. Raising objectives creates a argument to beg a question and demonstrates that a premise is unstated and uncertain. Epstein also discusses situations of refuting an argument. There are two ways to refute an argument. An argument can be refuted directly or indirectly. There are three direct ways of refuting an argument. The steps consist of illustrating at least one premise is dubious, demonstrating that the argument is not valid or strong and to prove that the conclusion is false.


Blankcanvas

Chapter 6: Compound Claims

I found many parts of chapter 6 interesting and useful. In the book, "Critical Thinking" by Richard L. Epstein, he explains compound claims. There are alternatives when looking at compound claims. Compound claims are claims that are composed of more than one claim, but the claim is viewed as just one. The claim is usually followed by the word "or". Epstein provides various examples of compound claims and explains ways we can reason with them. Another section that grabbed my interest was the alternatives. Epstein discusses the alternatives of a claim. As Epstein states, an alternative claim is parts of an "or" claim. Here are an example of each claim.

Example of compound claim:
Tomatoes are either a fruit or a vegetable.
Each is one claim, but is made up of two. Tomatoes are fruits. Tomatoes are vegetables.


Example of alternative claim:
You're either lying or telling the truth.
This provides two alternative.

Blankcanvas

Relevance

I found the relevance in an argument very interesting. In the book "Critical Thinking" by Richard L. Epstein, he discusses about the relevance in an argument. Relevance is when a person is able to connect with the matter of the argument. As stated in Epstein's book, a premise is irrelevant when a part of the argument can be deleted and the argument has no or little effect, meaning taking away does not weaken the argument. Irrelevant saying in an argument only creates a bad argument because it can make the premises irrelevant to the conclusion. Epstein explains that when a person tries to make a argument relevant bu adding more premises to link to the conclusion, the premises are not obvious to the other person. I think this reading was very helpful because when people argue, many tend to lean towards a different direction and add in irrelevant statements. Section d. relevance was very useful and I think it can useful for others as well.

Blankcanvas

Advertising on the Internet

https://www.getquicktrim.com/?mid=770303




Accepting and rejecting claims do not have any rules. There are three choices that a person can make to decide whether they believe a claim. The three choices consist of  accepting the claim, rejecting the claim or to suspend judgments. Although there are three choices, there are two exceptions as well, If we have good reason to doubt our memory or if our claim oppose. As stated in the book, "Critical thinking" by Richard L. Epstein, he states that our most reliable source of the world in from our own experience. In this advertisement, we can accept the claim from our own experience. I can relate to this advertisement, though I have not tried Quick Trim, other dieting products can compare very similarly. Many dieting advertisements usually try to convince a buyers that a product will help many pounds instantly, but most advertisements do not mention the list of things people have to do as well or what the products may effect.

Blankcanvas

Repairing Arguments

When violating the Principle of Rational Discussion, writers tend to mislead the argument and do not understand what they are talking about. With the guide of the Principle of Rational Discussion, we can distinguish whether an argument is strong or valid; if the writer understand the argument and if the argument begs the question. There are three steps to an argument needs to do to repair an argument. The steps consist of creating an argument stronger or valid, have plausible premises and have the premises more plausible than the conclusion. An example of an argument that may need repair may be...

All Filipinos can box because Manny Pacquiao is Filipino.

The premises is missing and unstated. Manny Pacquiao is a great boxer, but the argument is not plausible because not all Filipinos can box. The argument cannot be repaired because the needed premise to make the argument strong or valid makes the argument weak.

Blankcanvas

Organizational Relationships

In this weeks reading, I found many concepts interesting. One concept that caught my attention was one that I can relate to. In the book, "The Essential Guide to Group Communication" by O'Hair and Wiemann, discusses different types of communication that exist in organizations. Whether it is a relationship between superiors or subordinates, team leaders or team members and organizational departments, each person still communicates about different situations in the workplace. In my experience, working at Kaiser Permanente taught me many work ethics which consisted of communication within different departments. I worked with the Nursing Administration department, but was able to communicate other staffs from Health and Wellness, and Staff development. We had discussion on different issues, projects and how each day at the facility makes each one of us anxious to come back to work every day. Communication helps staffs work in good teams. Communication is an essential tool, especially in the workplace.

Violating the principle of rational discussion

Fallacies are bad arguments that are usally unrepairable or violate the Principle of Rational discussion. There are three types of fallacy types. The three fallacies consist of content fallacies, structural fallacies and violations of the principle of rational discussion. There are different content fallacies. Many arguments provide confusing objective and subjective claims, false dilemma, slippery slope and etc. Some of the fallacies with violating the principle of rational discussion happen when an argument begs a question, cover claims that are dubious and etc. I will provide an example of when an argument begs a question.

DMV works hours are on Monday-Friday. DMV is open every third Saturday of the month as well. Today is the third Saturday of this month. Therefore, DMV is open this Saturday.

The premises are plausible and the premises are more plausible than the conclusion, but there is no reason to believe the statements are true. DMV opens every third Saturday and today is the third Saturday, but how do we know if the electricy shorted out. Is this Satuday a holdiay?

Blankcanvas

Complex arguments for analysis

I'm on my way to school. I left five minutes late. Traffic is heavy. Therefore, I'll be late for class. So, I might as well stop and get breakfast.

Argument: Yes.
Conclusion:So I might as well stop and get breakfast.
Additional premises needed: I will be late for class if I am leaving for school five minutes late and traffic is heavy as well. Since I will already be late for class, I would rather be extra late or just miss class.
Identify any subargument: 1, 2 and 3 supports 4 and 4 supports the conclusion.
Good argument: It is a good argument if "I left five minutes late" is true, otherwise, the argument is weak.

The exercise was very useful. The exercise breaks down the argument making it much easier to understand. I think this exercise is another method that students can use when he or she is stuck with identifying each category. The usefulness of this exercise is also to help one think, analyze, regroup and come to a conclusion.

Blankcanvas

The role of leadership

Leadership is the effective towards a certain goal. It is the social influence and support for accomplishment. In the book, "The essential guide to group communication" by O'Hair and Wiemann, states that leadership can be defined as interpersonal influence, directed towards the communication process. O'Hair and Wiemann list four different types of leadership which consists of authoritarian, consultative, participative and laissez-faire. An authoritarian leader is strict, controlling and leads without any consideration from the other members of the group. Authoritarian leaders states his or her opinions, but does not make them open for discussion in a group effort. Consultative leaders is a bit more considerate because a consultative leader lets the group members participate, then makes a final decision after considering the members idea and opinions. Participative leader is most considerate. A participative leader works in a group and supports them to accomplish the task. A laissez-faire leader makes very little effort. I think I am a Participative leader. Although I work well independently, in group work, I like to hear and involve everyone's input.

Blankcanvas

Strong vs. Valid Arguments

An argument is strong if it is possible for the premise to be true but have the conclusion false. An argument is valid when the premise is true as well as the conclusion. A valid or strong argument does not depend on one's judgment on whether he or she thinks it is valid or strong. An argument is bad if there is no reason to believe the premises. An argument is also bad if the premises is not plausible than the conclusion.

Strong argument
Every si , rsx, and gsr manufactured by Honda that I know of has a dohc v-tech motor.
Therefore, all manufactured Honda si, rsx and gsr's has a dohc v-tec motor.

Valid argument
Honda only manufactures dohc v-tech motors for si, rsx and gsr.
Therefore, all manufactured Honda si, rsx and gsr's has a dohc v-tec motor.

Both of the premises are true and the conclusions follows the arguments.

Blankcanvas

Testing for a good argument

There are three steps to validate a strong argument. For an argument to be good; the premise should be reasonable; more reasonable than the conclusion. The argument must be valid or strong as well. The more reasons a claim can be true, the more it is plausible.

Excellent video games players spend many hours playing video games, and Ivan spend hours playing video games. Therefore, Ivan is an excellent video game player.

The premises of the argument are true. The conclusion of the argument is true as well, but it does not necessarily mean it is a good argument. Although both premises and conclusion may be true, it is a weak. Ivan spends many hours playing video games, but he can still be bad at video games. Being an excellent video game player takes technique, skills and hand and eye coordination. We can conclude excellent video game players may or may not spend hours playing video games; the hours spent is not relevant to the performance of the game player.

Blankcanvas

Explained concept

Critical thinking involves determining the meaning of what is expressed. Critical thinking helps see things in a different perspective in which we learn, evaluate and communicate. In the book, "The Essential Guide to Group Communication" by O'Hair and Wiemann, it explores certain steps on how to be effective and successful when working in a group. There are four steps in this process. The four steps consists of participating, interpreting, overcoming public speaking and taking an assignment into depth. When applying critical thinking in groups, good critical thinkers should learn how to expand their ability to strategize. You should clarify, summarize and identify the main ideas. when making attributes, it improves communication skills and public speaking fears. In group work, when each member provides different ideas, it shows various perspective of how one views a certain matter. Finally, the last step to work effectively in a group is overcoming your fear of speaking in front of others. I think this is the biggest and most challenging step for me. I, myself, do not present so well speaking in front of others, especially if it's a presentation, but in my experience, I learned that overcoming public speaking helped my communication skills in class, at home and in a professional environment.

Blackcanvas

Vague sentence

On a typical no class Friday, my friend Sarah and I hang out to catch up on what has been happening during the week since we attend different colleges. While we were updating each other on school related matter, I told her I needed to go to Target to buy some more notebooks for school. She replies, "You should buy some at Wal-Mart, notebooks are cheaper at Wal-Mart than at Target." This sentence was apparently vague. She didn't mention what kind of notebooks. Notebooks not only come in different brands, but have a different number of subjects in each notebook. If she were to say, "Five Star notebooks are cheaper at Wal-Mart than at Target" or "Five Star five subject notebooks are cheaper at Wal-Mart than at Target", it would not be considered vague because it is made clear and does not have different ways to understand it that cannot be settled on one.

Blankcanvas

Subjective and Objective Claims

Subjective claims are statements that involve judgments, opinions and feelings. Subjective claims can be true or false only depending on one's beliefs or feelings. Objective claims are the opposite, they are not subjective. Objective claims are statements that can be proven true or false.

PlayStation 3 is a better console than Xbox 360

This statement is a subjective. PlayStation is a console, but having it being "better" is one's judgment, opinion or feelings towards the system. Many people may feel PlayStation 3's controllers and features are easier to use while many other people feel the same towards the Xbox 360. The statement includes one's opinion which makes it subjective.

PlayStation 3 is manufactured by Sony

This statement is objective. This statement is objective because it does not involve one's beliefs towards it and can be proven true or false. Sony manufactured PlayStation when it first came out and is still currently manufacturing PlayStation 2, 3, and PlayStation Portable. It's first console was first introduced on December 3, 1995 in Japan.

Blankcanvas

Introductory Post

Hello class!

I am a full time sophomore student attending San Jose State University. I am currently taking prerequisites courses to pursue my goals as a nurse. I have encountered various situations where I have used my communication skills. One of my many experiences was during my first job. I was a summer intern at Kaiser Permanente working in the Nursing Administration department. With the intern program, we were fortunate to have a professional public speaker to coach the interns on how to improve communication in a professional environment. We were given difficult speeches, task and activities to help improve. Some of my interest are biking, skating, but mainly spending time with friends and family. Although this is my second online class, the desire2learn program is very new to me.

Until next time,

Blankcanvas