More in Depth

Fallacies are a very important concept that we must understand in order to not only create a good argument, but to also not fall victim to the many fallacies we are presented daily.  Although fallacies are “bad” and shouldn’t be used, they work extremely well to persuade the audience.  The appeal to emotion is just one of the many different types of fallacies.  It is so common that we usually are unaware of it’s existence and just overlook it.  Any time someone uses the audience’s emotion to their advantage in an argument, they are committing a fallacy.  The advertisement business is one of the biggest users of this particular fallacy.  The ad companies understand that using people’s emotions to their advantage are a great way to change their opinion about something whether it is a social issue, a product, or a person.  If we open up our eyes to the world around us, it won’t be hard to find many examples of the appeal to emotion.

And boom goes the dynamite,

Melvin Banner

Favorite-Least Favorite

To be completely honest, I loved posting blogs.  Blogging is something I have never done before but was always interested in.  I am an extremely opinionated person so it is nice to be able to share them with others.  The part that I love the most is that it is anonymous.  I is not that I care what people think of me, it is that people’s judgments of others, interferes with their critical thinking of what the post is actually saying.  I like talking about controversial things and topics that are “inappropriate” to talk about.

The one thing that I did not like about this class was the fact that it was online.  I’ve never taken one before this and I can be honest and say this is probably going to be my last.  I just found it extremely difficult to stay on top of it since I don’t really go on the computer that much.  Not having a set time and day for this class really hurt me but in the end I learned form it and grew.
To improve this class I would suggest having the class meet as a whole at least one time in the beginning of the course.

And boom goes the dynamite,

Melvin Banner

What I Learned

Over the course of this class there were many different things I learned.  I found that I was able to apply a lot of these concepts and ideas to my everyday life.  He main thing I learned what how to build a strong and valid argument.  I believe that I will be able to use this for a lot for my future classes whenever I need to write a paper.  Way form the beginning of the class we learned about subjective and objective claims.  These are things that I have found being used in every day conversation with friends, family and at work.  Also, all the different fallacies that we read and wrote about will definitely come in handy in the future.  This was also my first online class so I obtained skill and characteristics that I didn’t really have before.  This class forced me to be responsible for taking care of my own stuff.  I needed to be on top of what was due and when it needed to be turned in by.  It is a lot different then having a teacher tell me the assignments in person.

And boom goes the dynamite,

Melvin Banner

Feedback on the Second Assignment

The third post for this week is supposed to help us get some feedback about our first or second assignment so I chose the second one.  I found this to be quite unsuccessful because the people I chose were either too afraid to hurt my feelings or honestly couldn’t find any flaws.  So I guess you could consider it to still be a successful exercise if no flaws were found but it still didn’t help much.  The people I picked to show my paper to were my roommate, her sister, my mother and one of my coworkers.  All have at least some college education, which was important to me because I didn’t want anyone who couldn’t understand what I was asking for.  When I asked them all what they thought, I received answers like, “Oh it’s good, you will probably get a good grade,” or “I can’t find anything wrong.”  The only person to give me any sort of constructive criticism was my mother…  big surprise.  Haha but even then, all she said to me was that it was boring.  Looks like only time will tell what my group receives on our paper.

And boom goes the dynamite,

Melvin banner

Mission Impossi- I mean Mission Critical =]

The second online website/exercise we had to do was the Mission Critical website.  The massive amounts of information provided by this website was almost overwhelming.  After the initial shock of the amount of information I started reading.  There were many different links that we could choose from.  As well as sufficient amounts of information elaborating on the specific concepts, there were short quizzes a lot like the previous online assignment; the casual argument website.  Looking at the different concepts this website provided I decided to click on a few and try them out.  One in particular that helped me was the straw man fallacy.  I was having trouble understanding the straw man fallacy before I clicked on the link, read more in depth on the topic, and participated in the question at the end of the page.  This website is perfect for people who just need a little extra help on specific things we have learned in class.

And boom goes the dynamite,

Melvin Banner

Cause and Effect

The casual argument website really helped to elaborate on the reading of chapter 15 which was also about cause and effect.  The reading gave me a strong base understanding of the topic and different concepts.  The chapter talks about different things like some of the mistakes people make when looking for cause, how to find the cause in reverse, and even a whole section on simply how to find the cause normally.  The website gave a more in depth look at specific concepts within the topic of cause and effect.  The exercise asked three short but in depth questions that really helped understand the reading of the website.  It asked a question on "commonality," "difference," and determining the likelihood of a cause.  The fact that the exercise was so short was really good.  The saying "less is more" can be used to explain this.  When online exercises include 20+ question, it’s harder to remember them all. But when only three questions are included, there is a much better chance to remember and truly understand the concepts.

And boom goes the dynamite,

Melvin Banner

Graphs

Graphs are statistician’s tools of deception.  They can manipulate the looks of the graph in order to alter the viewer’s perspective of the information given.  There are different types of graphs including bar graphs, line graphs, pie charts, scatter plots and many more.  The different types of graphs are used for different types of information.  For example, information about the progress of a company over time would be shown on a time line while information about percentage of a whole would be shown in a pie chart.  Probably the most common of all graphs are bar graphs.  Bar graphs are the easiest to manipulate for companies.  The company can alter the y-axis to change the heights of the bars within the graph.  This is important for a company if they have to show the significance or insignificance of a change the company has made.  These techniques are also used when pitches are given to a board of executives to make whatever idea they’re pitching seem better.

And boom goes the dynamite,

-Melvin Banner

The First Course Assignments

The first course assignment deals with critical thinking in news and politics.  I specifically appreciated this assignment because it forced me to do some research on some different current events.  For somebody who doesn't pay any attention at all to the news or other world topics, reading up on current events was a good change.  I didn't even know some of the things were going on that I did research on.  For example, we did our research paper on the drug cartel in Mexico.  To be honest, I didn't even know that there was a dangerous drug cartel in Mexico, let alone that there was talk about the effect the legalization of marijuana would have on it. After this assignment I became less naive about what was going on in the world. Another benefit of have group assignments in an online class is the involvement with the other students.  Normally, in on online class, the student would never even meet each other.  It is always good to work on our cooperation skills with others.

And boom goes the dynamite,

Melvin Banner

Averages

Chapter 13 in our text talks about numbers.  Section 'C' specifically talks about averages.  The three different averages it talks about are mean, median, and mode.  The mean is found by adding up all the numbers and then dividing the sum by the amount of numbers that were added up.  The median is found by locating the middle number in a set of data.  With the median, 50% of the numbers are higher than it and 50% of the numbers are lower than it.  The mode is the number that occurs the most often in a set of data.  

We see these different types of averages in our every day life more often than we realize.  Mean, being the most commonly used type of average, is what most people think of when they hear the word "average."  For example, a baseball players batting average is found by using the mean.  The median is a better use of an average for a set of data with large outliers.  An example would be .  The mode is most likely used in a categorical set of data. For example, when a mother is trying to find out what to make for dessert, she will ask all her children and the most occuring answer will be what she makes.  

And boom goes the dynamite,

Melvin Banner

Deductive Reasoning

Deductive reasoning is a great way to develop a conclusion if you already have previous evidence.  In deductive reasoning, the argument consists of two premises and a conclusion.  If the premises are true, then it is impossible for the conclusion to be false, and visa-versa.  An example would be: 

Premise 1: Sam was killed with a blunt object.

Premise 2: Ten feet from his body was a bloody baseball bat.

Conclusion: Sam was killed with the baseball bat.

Detectives use deductive reasoning all the time as well as almost everybody, we just don’t realize it most of the time.  Detectives use the information they have been given (premise one and two) in order to logically come up with a valid conclusion.  Then after further testing, their argument or hypothesis is tested in the lab.  For example, there is still a small chance that the blood on the baseball bat isn’t Sam’s, but we find that to be very unlikely.  Let’s say it was Sam’s blood though, and we also found Dan’s fingerprints on the handle of the bat.  We can use deductive reasoning again:

Premise 1: The fingerprints on the bat are those of the murderer.

Premise 2: Dan’s fingerprints are on the baseball bat.

Conclusion: Dan brutally murdered Sam with the baseball bat.

And boom goes the dynamite,

Melvin Banner

Appeal to Patriotism

http://youtu.be/Ezk0e1VL80o

For a recent Superbowl, Dodge made a commercial for their Charger that was a clear appeal to Patriotism.  The commercial starts out with a small army of Red Coats from the revolutionary war in battle formation.  Then over the horizon, George Washington is seen driving an all black Charger with an American flag sticking out the window.  As George Washington (plus two more Chargers) and his army close behind race towards the Red Coats, they become afraid, break ranks, and scatter towards the forest.  The commercial ends with the image of George Washington victoriously standing next to the threee Chargers and the American flag.  Then a deep voice says, "Here's a couple of things America got right; cars and freedom."  This commercial is the definition of the appeal to patriotism.  By associating the idea of freedom and the Charger, Dodge is hoping that the commercial will create a mutual positive feeling for the car and freedom since most everybody would already agree that freedom is a good thing.  Although it is a fallacy to appeal to emotions and it might not be a good argument to say that America makes good cars because we won our freedom, some people can't help but to like the Charger more after seeing this commercial.  This commercial will work on American's who have a lot of pride for their country.

And boom goes the dynamite,
Melvin Banner

Appeal to Emotion

Although using emotions as a way to appeal to your audience is a very persuasive way to get them to believe your argument, it is a major fallacy. People use other's emotions in place of sufficient reasoning for their argument.  The person knows that if they can get the audience to feel good about their claim, then they don't need to provide strong or valid reasoning.  A specific type of appeal to emotion is the appeal to pity. This is when somebody uses pity to convince another person to believe their claim. This is seen a lot when people try to get out tickets.  A cop will pull somebody over for speeding, and they will usually make an excuse that appeals to the cops pity.  An example would be, "Oh, I'm sorry officer. I didn't notice how fast I was going because i have a lot on my mind. You see, I just caught my girlfriend cheating on me... with my father."  Something like that would be considered an appeal to emotion because the driver is attempting to get the officer to feel pity for him hoping that he could get out of the ticket.

And boom goes the dynamite,
Melvin Banner

Symbols and Truth Tables

This section in the book talks about compound claims and how ttuthful or false they are.  The book uses four words/phrases to analyze the different compund claims and they are; and, or, not, if...then....  The book then continues to elaborate on each word/phrase:

And: A conjunction is true when both parts are true. Otherwise it is false.

Or: A negotion is true if its part false; it is false if its part is true.

Not: A disjuction is false if both parts are false. Otherwise it is true.

If...then...: A conditional is false if the antecedent is true and the consequent is false. Otherwise it is true.

                          ---We can use these four concepts everyday in our lives---

An example of a conjuction would be, 'Baxter is a cat and Baxter doesn't like dogs.' This claim would only be true if both parts were true.

An example of a negotion would be, 'The sun has not set.' It is very obvious that if the sun is set, then this claim would be false but if the sun has not set, then the claim is true.

An example of a disjuction would be, 'You are smart or you are stupid.'  Disjunctions claims are true when only one part of the claim is true and the other is false.  Since it is impossible to be stupid and smart, the 'or' claim is true.

An example of a conditional would be, 'If you study hard, then you will have a better chance to pass this class.'  Since we know that study definitaly increases somebodies test scores, this claim is true since both the antecedent and the consequence are true.

And boom goes the dynamite,
Melvin Banner

Between one and all

Chapter 8 in our text is titled "General Claims."  Section C talks about precise and vague generalities and I found the vague generalities to be very applicable to my own life.  These are when we use words like "almost all," "very few," "some," "many," or "all."  Vague generalities might not be valid but we can use them in a strong argument.  The book uses an example about dogs barking.

"Very few dogs don't bark.
Spot is a dog.
So Spot barks."

As we can see, not all dogs bark but since a majority of them do, we can assume Spot barks since he is indeed a dog.

When I was reading this section, I immediately thought about stereotypes.  For example:

Most Asians are bad drivers.
Jim is an Asian.
So Jim is a bad driver.

Although this might indeed be a vague generality, it still isn't a strong argument because the first statement isn't necessarily true.  You must be careful when dealing with these vague generalities because unless it's a fact, people tend to over-exaggerate things.

And boom goes the dynamite,
Melvin Banner

Compund Claims

Chapter six in the Epstein text discusses compound claims.  The text defines that a compound claim is one composed of other claims, but which has to be viewed as just one claim.  Last night while I was out with my friends, my ear caught one of my friends making a compound claim.  Two of my friends were playing a drinking game and since Dan lost he had to chug the rest of his large cup.  He was trying to avoid it because he knew that it wouldn't be good.  Then Dan told Nick, who won, that he was either going to chug the rest of his drink, or buy him a six-pack.  By saying that, Dan wasn't promising that he was going to chug the beer, and he also wasn't promising that he was going to buy Nick a six-pack.  What Dan did say however, was that he was going to do one or the other.  This is a compound claim because two claims are put together to create one claim.

And boom goes the dynamite,
Melvin Banner

Refuting Directly

Chapter seven of our text is entitled, "Counter-Arguments" and as one would guess... it discusses counter-arguments.  The concept that made the most sense to me was about refuting an argument directly.  I've always tended to tackle things head on in my life and attacking somebody else's argument falls into that category.  Our text says that there are three main ways to directly refute an argument which are: Show that at least one of the premises is dubious, show that the argument isn't valid or strong, or show that the conclusion is false.  The book uses an example about how killing flies is useless because the fast ones will survive and then evolution will take over creating super fast flies.  It was a funny example but it really helped me to apply the concept to my own life.  Just this morning during a workout, my friend told me that if I don't drink protein shakes then it will be impossible for me to get bigger and stronger.

Clearly this claim was weak.  Immediately many counter arguments rushed through my mind so I started fireing them out.  I said things like "That's BS, I can get bigger and stronger by simply working harder." "A full diet can supply me the same amount of protein as one of those shakes, and on top of that, it would be natural."  "Spartans and other ancient warriors didn't use any suppliments and they were finely-tuned killing machines."

Yes, drinking the suppliments would help to increase my results, but it is not the only other way to succeed.  By giving my friend alternative ways to get bigger and stronger, I proved that his argument wasn't very strong.  I was able to use the real life example of the Spartan warriors as proof that using suppliments aren't the ONLY way to get bigger and stronger, also showing that his argument wasn't valid.

And boom goes the dynamite,
Melvin Banner

False Dilemma

Chapter six from our text, Critical Thinking is entitled “Compound Claims.”  One of the interesting concepts it discusses is that of a false dilemma.  Our book defines a false dilemma as, “a bad use of excluding possibilities where the ‘or’ claim is false or implausible.  Sometimes just the dubious ‘or’ claim itself is called a ‘false dilemma.’”  In other words, somebody gives another person only two options and makes it seem like those are the ONLY two options when in reality there are multiple other possibilities. 

            I’ve experienced people attempting to give me these ultimatum sorts of claims many times in my life.  My favorite I’ve ever heard was by my ex-girlfriend.  One of my best friends accidently urinated on my wall, books, and some clothes late one night.  The next morning my girlfriend was furious with me for still being his friend.  She went off about how I needed to stop letting people walk all over me in my life and that I had to either stop being his friend, or I had to at least act angry towards him.  Although it is a valid argument with two probable responses, this is still a false dilemma because there are many other options that she didn’t consider.  For her, forgiving my friend wasn’t a possibility that she purposed to me.  Luckily, I knew my ex-girlfriend’s claim was dubious and I was able to simply forgive my best friend and the whole situation became something we still laugh about to this day.  

Innuendo

An innuendo is a claim that is disguised so the reader will have to assume what the true claim is.  The claim is usually concealed due to its usually vulgar or unpleasant content.  Innuendos allows writers to talk about things that wouldn't normally be accepted.  For example: Before any sexual context was allowed to be shown on television and in the theatre, writers would use sexual innuendos so that the viewer wouldn't actually see anything sexual, but would still know when something sexual happened.  Writers have a lot of fun with innuendos because some of the innuendos require a bit of intelligence, and if the veiwer isn't paying close enough attention, they might miss it.

And boom goes the dynamite,
Melvin Banner

Advertizing On The Internet

Chapter 5 "Is That True" in the book Critical Thinking talks about evaluationg the premise, the criteria for accepting or rejecting the claim, and advertizing on the internet.  The most annoying types of advertizing i've seen on the internet is the pop-up games, where all you have to do to win something is complete a simple task like "Out Drink The Frat Boy."  Advertizements like this are just tricks to get people to go to their webpage by forcing the person to click the link.  I learned that these types of advertizements are almost always phony.  Many advertizements only get their money from how many people visit their page, so by tricking a web surfer into clicking the link, they will recieve money.

People often fill in the blanks and assume things when they are read. For example, after reading that ad your brain probably processed that if you beat the frat boy in drinking, then they will give you a free Nintento Wii.  On closer inspection however, nothing besides spatial relations connects the two statements.  It doesn't say "If you win, you get a free Wii." The premise and the claim of the ad's argument are weak and we can not accept them.  These types of ads are sketchy and unreliable.  I know this from personal experience because i one spent over an hour trying to find out how to recieve my prize,  but it was impossible.

And boom goes the dynamite,
Melvin Banner

Violating the Principle of Rational Discussion

Chapter 11 "A summary of bad arguments" in the book Critical Thinking, talks about the different fallacies we see in arguments.  The book defines a fallacy as, "a bad argument of one of the types that have been agreed to be typically unrepairable."  One of the fallacies that i am very familiar with is the appeal to emotion.  For an argument, the concluding claim should not be a descritpive claim relating to emotions.  Emotions are subjective and make for weak factual arguments.  An example of this fallacy would be the good ol' saying, "Drink your sorrows away."  The quote means that if somebody is sad about something, then they should just get drunk to make it feel better.  Because it appeals to somebody's emotions, this statement is clearly a fallacy.  On top of that, we already know that drinking doesn't solve anything so we know that this is a bad argument.

And boom goes the dynamite,

Melvin Banner

Strong Vs. Valid Argument

The art of an argument.  Occupations such as lawyers and lobbiests rely on the skill of arguing to do their jobs.  There are two different types of arguments: strong and valid.  A strong argument is when the evidence is very convincing but the conclusion might not necessarily be true.  In a valid argument, the conclusion is always undeniable so the strength of the argument comes from the facts.

A lawyer that is in defense of a murder suspect would use a strong argument to fight the case.  Because it is unknown whether the defendent is the actual murderer or not, the evidence used to support the argument must be strong enough to convince the jury of his innocence.  "The defendent was visiting his grandma in the hospital, so therefore he could not have murdered the victim who was over 50 miles away."Although it is a good argument, there are still ways the defendent could have committed the crime.

Now lets say that the defendent was still found guilty.  Somebody viewing this hearing could make a valid argument by saying, "Looks like he's going to be locked up for at least a quarter century."  This is a valid argument because the minimum prision sentence for somebody convicted of murder is 25 years.  The sentence can be extend however, for the rest of the convict's life.

And boom goes the dynamite,
Melvin Banner

Subjective and Objective Claims

Subjective and objective claims are complete opposite of each other.  While objective claims can be defined as factual information, subjective claims can be looked at as argumental topics that different people can have different opinions about.  Coincidentally, about an hour ago my brother exclaimed that Samual Adams Boston lager is the best beer in the world.  Taking the opportunity to argue, I explained to him that the best beer is actually Blue Moon for its smooth texture and unique taste.  Technically, neither of us were wrong because deciding which beer is truly the best is a desicion based off opinions and opinions can not be 100% proven as facts.  There is no true way of telling which beer is better which makes it a subjective claim.  Shortly after our subjecive discussion, my brother made an objective claim by saying that the propane tank for the BBQ was out of gas.  (This was a problem considering we were only half way through grilling up some burgers and hot dogs haha.)  Objective claims are topics that can not be argued because it has factual information to back up the claim.  The meter on the propane tank read empty, so clearly my brother's claim was undeniably true.

And boom goes the dynamite,
Melvin Banner

Introductory Post

Hello class mates.  My alias name is Melvin Banner and I am a simple person who tries to live the phrase carpe diem.  I would give everything for my friends and family.  Previous to this class I have taken a comm 20 class which is public speaking.  My major is psychology and I am hoping to one day become a therapist to help others "seize the day."  People tell me that I think differently than most and I just tell them it is because I am overly logical =].  I don't let things bother me because I believe that everything happens for a reason.  I am a hardcore believer in karma so when people do shady things to me, I feel sorry for them.  I am very excited to get to know everyone this summer!

-Melvin Banner