Liked and Disliked

I found this class very informative and enjoyable at the same time. Mainly because all the stuff I learned in this class can be applied to the real world. What I liked about this class the most was that it was online and I did not have to show up to class. I was able to work on multiple stuff and still get my online stuff done. My least favorite thing about this class was that every post had to be at least 12 hours apart from the other post. I would always be busy with school and work that I just wanted to post everything at the same time. But if there wasn’t a time span I probably would have done everything in the last minute and stress out about it. I really like how this class was set up so I really would not change anything about it. :)

Cause Effect Website

This website is an introduction to casual arguments. The website states that arguing causation if extremely important for inductive reasoning. Lawyers use casual arguments all the time because they are always trying to prove what caused something and how that caused something else which proves their point. There must also be a commonality in the argument for it to be inductive. The website goes on explaining the three factors that the strength of casual arguments rely on.
1). How acceptable the unspoken judgment is.
2). How likely the causation is
3). How trustworthy the "only significant difference" is
The website also states that a strong correlation is not enough to prove causation.
I found this website useful and the example of the driver and the bicyclist useful but a bit confusing at times. The exercises were very helpful though because they explained why I was correct or incorrect, which helped me understand the concept better.

Mission Critical

When I first went on the Mission Critical website I was alarmed because there were so many links and I didn't know where to start. I then started reading through everything and the website was very helpful and I wished I knew about this website earlier. The website goes over the basics, analyzing arguments, and fallacies. There were many good examples and explanations that gave me better understanding on those subjects. The website went into further detail on common fallacies, for example straw man. The questions asked in the end were very helpful because they explained why I was correct or incorrect. The website also went into further discussion on deductive and inductive arguments. Using this website and Critical Thinking by Epstein together helps me see more examples and see what I do not understand and what I do. This website is useful as an extra explanation guide to Epstein.

Reasoning by Analogy

Reasoning by analogy is when a comparison becomes an argument. The things being compared must be similar in a way so long that the differences do not matter. Arguments by analogy seek to set up relative identity. We draw a conclusion on one side and on the other side we infer the same. The comparison help our argument so we can draw a conclusion out of it. You need to note that not every comparison is an argument. This can be very good for legal analysis because it can be used to prove or disprove something easily. When done appropriately it can increase the knowledge of the reader. However reasoning by analogy can be used immorally, such as propaganda. We use reasoning by analogy all the time and they are a great way to start a discussion.

Sign Reasoning

Sign reasoning was the most difficult type of reasoning to grasp for me. I read a summary on it but that did not help at all. I found this link to a powerpoint and it turned out to be very helpful:
http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/rgass/HCOM%20235%20Fall%202008/Sign%20reasoning.ppt
This powerpoint shows a lot of real life examples of sign reasoning including one that I thought was funny, signs of your significant other cheating.

Sign reasoning is when the existence of one thing indicates another event, but does not mean it causes the other event. The website uses the phrase "Judging a book by its cover" is exactly that. The cover of a book has nothing to do with the actual reading content of the book.

Other examples:
"That girl is stick skinny, she probably is anorexic."
"He hasn't been picking up his phone, he is probably ignoring me."
Both of these examples are judgements and opinions which have to do with a sign that makes them believe something.

Reasoning Examples

1. Reasoning by Analogy
Premise 1: At 18 years of age you are allowed to smoke and vote
Premise 2: You are also considered an adult.
Conclusion: 18 year olds should be allowed to drink alcohol legally as well.

2. Sign Reasoning
The girl in front of me always comes in with baggy sweats and a tshirt. She probably doesn't have anything else to wear.

3. Casual Reasoning
Premise 1: I woke up late this morning.
Premise 2: I ended up being late to work.
Conclusion: Which caused me to be in a bad mood all day.

4. Reasoning by Criteria
In order to be done the work needs to be colorful, visual, and easily read. I see that you are not quite finished yet.

5. Reasoning by Example
You shouldn't go out and party too much. I have a friend who partied at least two times a week and got bored of that life easily.

6. Inductive
It has been raining for the past two days and the sky is still cloudy. It will rain tomorrow as well.

7. Deductive
Premise 1: All mammals need to consume water.
Premise 2: I am a mammal.
Conclusion: So i need to consume water.

Apple Polishing

Appeal to vanity is a type of flattering. Apple polishing is an appeal to vanity. Many advertisements use appeal because many people care about their physical appearances. Apple polishing is a strategy when compliments are used in order for a person to agree with them. In order for some of these kid or arguments to work the person being complimented must be very vain but then sometimes they make a person feel good. My mom knows that when I want something I tend to compliment her. I laugh about it know because I use apple polishing all the time.

An example is:
Mom sorry that I left a mess but I noticed that you been working out lately. I complimented her so I can avoid her getting mad at me. It works sometimes when I present a good argument must most of the time it does not work because she notices what I try to do.

Page 195 Problem Number 3

The first thing I think about when I heard the phrase appeal to fear Hitler and Nazis. This is because they use many persuasive tactics that had to do with fear. They also used propaganda, which can be considered exactly that, advertisements persuading people with fear. Appeal to fear is when a person tries to create support for an argument by creating support. This fallacy is mainly used for politics and marketing.

This advertisement I found is an example of appealing to fear. Specifically because the image is of a dead person. The point that they are trying to give across is if you would rather get your cholesterol level checked or die because you never got it tested. This is considered a conditional claim because it is using or. Or is being used as a scare tactic because they want the person reading the argument to decided one or the other.

Appeal to Emotion

I have heard many people use the quote "think with your brain and not your heart," but emotions should fit into our reasoning. That doesn't mean that your emotions should decided everything. Appeal to emotion can be a fallacy and instead of facts, persuasive language is usually used for the foundation of this type of argument. Appeals to emotion are intended for the person reading the information to have intuitive feelings. The person then is convinced by the arguments because of the feelings they are feeling, like joy and sadness. It does not mean that all appeal to emotion-based arguments are true.

Here is a list of some Appeals to Emotion: appeal to pity, appeal to fear, appeal to spite, and appeal to vanity.

Appeal to vanity stood out to me because I see it all the time especially in advertisements. It is sometimes call apple-polishing and it is usually by paying compliments.

Assignment #2

For the assignment critical thinking and social organizations my group and I decided to write about the PETA organization. This assignment was very useful because it gets us working in a group to complete research, retrieve information, and decide what is the most important concepts or ideas to talk about. Our group got together and decided how to split everything up and then synthesized everything together. At first I was thinking that this was going to be a drag because I usually like doing things myself because I don't like to depend on others. Then I realized that my group was really efficient which made things real easy and simple. For example, once our whole group met up and decided to split things up and email your own part in a week, everyone did so. That meant we just had to put everything together and revise it and we were done. I learned that it is not always hard working in a group and it can usually be very useful.

Chapter 8 General Claims

When taking a glance at general claims they can be easily considered valid. This is because vague words are usually used which might make a claim actually false when you believe it is true. Some of the vague words that might be used are: all, some, a lot of, a few, very few, and almost all. When words such as all and some are used correctly they make general claims valid, well they obviously won't be valid if the claim if not true. According to Epstein all means" Every single one, no exception," and some means "At least one."

Example of a valid form, using all:
All SAT  exams are created by the SAT committee. They are created similarly with the same concepts. So all the exams test the same concepts. Valid
Example of an invalid form, using some:
Some birds can fly. Chickens are considered birds. So chickens can fly. Invalid because chickens can't fly

General claims also have contradictories. There are many different ways to use those words and also the opposite of them
Example:
Claim- All vegans eat vegetable.
Contradictory- Some vegans don't eat vegetables.

Chapter 6 Compund Claims

A compound claim is made up of other claims but has to interpreted as just one claim. There are many examples of compound claims and I will be going over the two: "or" claims and conditionals. But first of all I need to make clear that not every sentence that contains to claims is a compound claim. An example of that would be:
She is going to become a nurse because she is attending college.
That is actually an argument not a claim.

"Alternatives are the claims that are the parts of an 'or' claim." Arguments may be weak because the function of a compound claim is causing it to be weak. These kind of claims also help excluding possibilites.

A conditional claim is usually written as an "If... then..." claim and must have truth value. This is the way most people talk about how things could turn out in particular situations.

Criteria for Accepting or Rejecting Claims

We suspend the judgment about a claim when we need to investigate more the figure out if the claim is true. There are many was of accepting to rejecting these claims. Personal experience is a way because everyone has experienced many stuff in life that others have not but if you are sure that it has happened or is happening then you can accept the claim or vice versa. For this to be true we must not doubt our memory at all. We can accept a claim when it comes from a reliable source who has authority and their main point is not to mislead. W can also accept a claim from a reference source and media, like the news channel, that are usually reliable. As most people know we can reject an argument if other arguments contradict with it. It is hard to reject and accept claims especially when not much contradiction is occurring and it is all believable. These steps will just help to make everything easier.

Advertising and the Internet

I found a pretty funny political advertisement that was about George W. Bush but they are advertising mattresses. This is the link to it:
http://pzrservices.typepad.com/advertisingisgoodforyou/images/2008/05/31/skbedding1.jpg

The premises for the advertisement is the picture. It has to do with many evil things, in their opinion. Which include George W. Bush, the KKK, war, and fighting for oil. Under the picture there is a statement, "Who says there's no rest for the wicked?" This advertisement was created by Dreamland Mattresses. They are trying to put across that their mattresses are the best that evil people can sleep through the night if they us that mattress brand.

There is no good reason to believe the premises and the premises are not more plausible than the conclusion. So the argument is not good, mainly because this is more of a joke. I am not rejecting the claim nor accepting it. Just because I do not believe it does not make it false. Advertisers main point is to sell the product so they are not a reliable source.

Organizational Relationships

In a workplace their are certain relationships that have to be set in order to provide good service or achieve their goals. These relationships are important to establish because it will make communicating even easier. I have learned this from experience; I started as a cashier at my job and  I am a manger now.

Relationship between Superiors and Subordinates
Communication needs to happen in order to get tasks completed and making sure everything is done properly. A boss also need to do annual reviews on an employee so the employee knows what they need to improve on.

Relationship between Team Leaders and Team Members
I believe this relationship is the most important because it creates the atmosphere of how the group is working. If a manger is being energetic then group members will enjoy working with that manager. My top manager always talks about how everyone working should treat each other as family. We must be supportive and help each other to get things done or nothing will ever get completed. Which is true, the better relationship a manager has with a team member the more progress is made.

Relationship between Organizational Departments
Organization and documentation is essential so that all services are accounted for.

Complex Arguments for Analysis

#3 on pg. 225
Las Vegas has too many people. (1) There’s not enough water in the desert to support more than a million people. (2) And the infrastructure of the city can’t handle more than a million: (3) the streets are overcrowded (4) and traffic is always congested; (5) the schools are overcrowded (6) and new ones can’t be built fast enough. (7) We should stop migration to the city by tough zoning laws in the city and country. (8)

Argument: Yes
Conclusion: 8
Additional premises needed? Infrastructure must be defined or else you must know what it means to understand this argument. Describing what tough zoning laws can be implemented in (8). Making statements 1, 2,3,4, and 5 if statements like: If there's not enough water for more people, then their are too many people.
Identify any subargument: 2 and 3 are subarguments of 1. 4, 5, 6, and 7 support 3. 1 supports 8.
Good Argument? It is a good argument but would be better if 8 was developed more.

The exercise was useful because it allowed me to break up the statement to make more sense of it. I was able to distinguish the difference between a conclusion and premises. It also made me think about what I can do to make arguments stronger and more believable.

Violating the Principle of Rational Discussion

A person is violating the principle of rational discussion when it seems as if they do not comprehend
what is reasonable, they are deliberately misleading, or it is not an argument at all. An example would be relevance. Relevance is the observation of the premise not being relevant to the conclusion in an argument. This causes the argument to be weak and unrepairable.

For example one of my coworkers was trying to explain to me what had happen while I was gone. She was talking so fast that her conclusion was unrelated to her testimony.

Maria: Someone got in a car accident on the driveway and my eye was bothering me, so I thought I could just leave early.
Me: What does the accident and your eye have to do with you leaving early?

Other instances of violation are:
Begging the Question- The premises being more plausible than the conclusion.
Strawman- "Putting words in the other person's mouth."
Shifting the burden of proof- Asking for someone to repudiate your statement rather than proving it yourself.

The Tests for an Argument to be True

According to Epstein in Critical Thinking, there are three requirements to test if an argument is true. They are: (1) The premises are plausible, (2) the premises are more plausible than the conclusion, and (3) the argument is valid or strong. In other words the foundation must be reasonable and more credible than the conclusion and also be strong or valid. A argument, for example, states:

It has been raining for the past three days and the sky is still cloudy. Dark cloudy skies usually indicate that there will be rain. So it will rain today.

It has true premises and the argument is strong. It is true because it is likely for it to rain for three days straight, even more because weather is unpredictable. The conclusion may be false but the premises is more reasonable than the conclusion. This is because the reasoning is good because clouds cause rain.

Strong versus Valid Arguments

"A strong argument with true premises is sometimes better than a valid one with the same conclusion," according to Epstein. An argument is said to be strong if it is there is a chance for the conclusion to be false but the premises true. If there are any possibilities that the conclusion is false the likelihood is small. An argument is thought to be valid if there is no way, at the same time, the conclusion is incorrect and the premises is true. For an argument to be strong or valid its premises must be more reasonable than its conclusion. If two arguments had the same conclusion but one was valid and the other one was strong, the strong argument with a true foundation would be better than a valid with correct evidence.

Leadership

I believe that in order for a group to accomplish a goal or what they have to do successfully, a good leader should be in charge. There are different types of leadership which have their own ups and downs. They are authoritarian, consultative, participative, and laissez-faire, which are listed in the Group Communication book. Authoritarian leaders makes decision without any input on what the members of the group have to say. Consultative leaders focus on the opinions of the other group members but make the decision on their own. Participative leaders work together with their group to make decisions and solve problems. Laissez-faire form of leadership on the other hand seems less effective because there is no form of communicating what needs to be done without anyone telling them what should be done. 
I have always been told to be a leader never a follower but not everyone can be a leader at the same time. It is a good idea to know how a leader should think so people can give their own input on how a group should be run and help out so not all the responsibilities become the leaders. This is all very important because I work and the main point of my job is to be a leader. I have to manage everything that is around me and all the employees. While giving everyone their breaks and setting a good example of what they should be doing. By the way, I work as a shift manager at McDonald's. It is not a dream job at all but at least I'm making money.  I have also noticed that once someone sets up their form of leadership it is very hard to change and I have noticed that with other managers I have worked with.

Attributions

Attributing something is to think of something as caused by a specific circumstance or reason. Attributions are made when you try to explain why someone did or is doing something. The more you observe someone, the more you get to know them and that is when you start to think more about their behaviors. Making attributions is different than assuming because when attributing understanding of the individual is essential. Attributing can make a person better at communicating because they do not just think about superficial things like someone being late. They understand that many things can go wrong which can cause someone to be late. In a group setting it can be very useful because you can help out people when help is needed and perceive what someone else might be thinking. I have a really close friend and it seems as if we can read each others minds. This is because we have many similar ideas but also because we both make many attributions about each other because we hang out a lot.

~Reina Trillo

Subjective and objective claims

A subjective claim is subjective based if a person or group is able to think or feel that the claim may be true or not. To keep it simple a claim is objective if it is not a personal because it is not based on anyones opinion of it being true or not. Weather is misty always subjective because someone might think it is pretty cold outside but someone else might think that it is only a bit chilly.
Someone recently asked me how short I was. I said I am five feet and an inch tall, which is considered to be objective. Then they responded by saying "You are very short." That claim is subjective because that is what they feel about my height. The statement of how tall I am is objective because it does not rely on anyone believing it is true or false. When they said I was short it was their own opinion because I do not consider myself to be very short. The word they used to describe my height is vague and can be thought about in many different ways.

~Reina Trillo

Vague Sentence

I recently met up with a friend at the Student Union. Before I had gotten there she had left me a voicemail saying that she was next to the purple wall. I was really confused especially because I had not notice that there was a purple wall in the Student Union. The voicemail was very vague and that is what made me confused. The sentence is vague because it was not clear and anyone could have understood those words differently. Once I got there, I saw two small purple walls and a long wall but it had three sides to it. My friend could have meant any of those walls. I then called her and asked what purple wall. She started laughing and said the one facing Jamba Juice. She then told me that her friend had her confused also with the purple wall. Vague sentences usually cause confusion or may be interpreted the wrong way.

~Reina Trillo

Hello my fellow Comm41 classmates!

My name is Reina Trillo and this year will be my second year at SJSU. I took Comm20, Public Speaking, last year and it was awesome. I learned many things including how to be a better listener. I am mainly taking this course because it satisfies GE requirements but I do hope to learn a lot. Being able to think critically is very important especially if you want to accomplish many things in life. This is my first time taking an online class. I hope this semester goes by fast ;) I spend my weeks working, going to school, exercising, and hanging out with my friends.  
~Reina Trillo