Chapter 7 Concept

One of the concepts that caught my eye in chapter 7 was raising objections to counter certain arguments. This concept states that instead of directly evaluating an argument, they will simply raise objections to disprove that claim or argument. In doing this, we are showing that the argument or claim on the other end is false or weak. This is usually how arguments go between people who disagree about something. Someone will say a claim that is made, and then in order to show how that claim is weak, the other person will raise an objection. I think a lot of students use this in their persuasive essays when they bring up the other side of their subject. Though they will recognize the main points of the counter-argument, they will bring up objections to make their paper stronger. This way, they are not only showing how the counter-argument is weak, but they are also showing how their argument is stronger.

Chapter 6 Interesting Concept

One concept which I found interesting and one which caused me to immediately think of a story I could apply to this concept was reasoning with "or" claims. This concept states that if the premise is true, then there is no way for the  conclusion to be false at the same time. So basically, if A or B plus A, then B will occur. One example I thought of was at my work, Camp Kids, we have to do different things to try and get our kids attention. One way we do that is let them decide how long they want to take to quiet down. So we might say "Either you all need to be quiet and listen up, or we will just stand out here until you are quiet". So, if they didn't quiet down, then we would just stand out there until they realized they needed to be quiet. So because the A wasn't true, then the conclusion would be true and we would wait. But if they did immediately quiet down, then we wouldn't have to stand there and wait for them. So if the premise is true, then the conclusion would have to be false.

Interesting Concept

One concept that I read about that I thought was very interesting, and that I totally agree with, is the concept of rational discussion, and what that entire principle covers. I think that the example in the book is very helpful in understanding what this principle is trying to say. Basically, this principle states that in this situation, we automatically assume the other person knows what we are talking about, and has the capability to converse about the subject with you logically and rationally. The example in the book is a professor dropping off his car at an auto shop, coming back later, and having the mechanic tell him he "needs a new fuel injector". The professor questions her, asking if he really needed a new one. In this situation, the mechanic does not realize the professor does not know what he means or is talking about because the professor is not a mechanic, and doesn't understand how is car operates. I think this happens more and more in everyday life and people do not realize it.

Advertisement

http://10steps.sg/wp-content/uploads/article99/13-nike-futbol.jpg

In this advertisement, Nike is trying to promote their soccer gear, while making a joke about scuba divers compared to soccer players. For me, all I need to be able to see if this claim they make is acceptable is to use my own personal experience, since I have played soccer for many years, and have also purchased many items from Nike, so I can use that to my evaluation as well. Also, I have many friends who play soccer or who are and have been very active in sports, who also have bought many items from Nike to use. In my experience, I have always found that Nike's products have not worn out or broken down easily, and I have been able to wear them out very nicely. Though their products are a little more expensive, it has benefited me more to buy these things to be able to use for a longer time. My friends have also never really complained about what they have bought from Nike. So I think the claim that Nike makes in this ad is an acceptable claim.

Chapter 11 Fallacies

In chapter 11, one content fallacy that I see a lot of times nowadays with kids my age is the bad appeal to common belief or practice fallacy. This fallacy states that if a certain group of people believes in an idea or do something that supports that belief, then it is a good belief or action that is justified. In simple terms, it is the "bandwagon" fallacy, which means that if enough people do something, then it is cool, and to jump on that bandwagon would make you cool. A classic example that I remember my parents using on me if I got into this situation would be "If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you?". Nowadays though, I think a good example is that so many party and drink, which may pressure other into thinking that if they do the same thing, that will make them look cool because they jumped on that "partying bandwagon". Some of my friends in college tried to convince me to drink because they thought it was fun or cool. Though it may seem that way to people who do it, from my perspective, it is a bad appeal to common belief, which is that there are more consequences than benefits that come from drinking and partying.

Interesting Concept

I think an interesting concept that we read about was about being able to evaluate certain premises concerning arguments. I think it is good that one of the most important things we are able to use make our argument stronger or more valid is our own real life experience. It is key to do this because we are able to trust our own experience's, which can make our arguments better and clearer. Also, being able to judge arguments that seem to not have much support is important. This way, if you can tell the argument is weak, you can construct your own argument with plenty of support and facts that make it clear and valid. I personally believe be able to rationally argue with people is important part of communications. By being able to construct strong, clear arguments and statements to people, it will become easier to converse with others whose opinions may differ from yours. So by being able to evaluate the premise of certain arguments, you can become better with speech overall.

Strong versus Valid Arguments

When talking about valid arguments, as long as the original premise is true, then the conclusion that can be drawn form that premise should also be true. An easy way to remember this to me is through some simple math equations. As long as A=B, and B=C, then A=C. Though this is just with letters and not with actual statements, I believe it still helps in determining whether or not an argument is valid or not. An example for this is that "Students must pass Calculus AB to take the AP Calculus test". I could say that "I took the AP Calculus test yesterday". Therefore, "I must have passed Calculus AB". Because it is stated that I took the AP test, that agrees with the fact that I had to have passed Calculus AB, which is a true conclusion.
On the other hand, strong arguments, though with similar premises, have false conclusions that are usually drawn front the original statement. Though the argument in itself may seem to have strong points or facts to back itself, the conclusion can still be false. One example is to say "Teens must be at least 16 years of age to receive their drivers license". If I were to say "My friend Jordan just had his 17th birthday last week", a false conclusion would be to say "Then Jordan must have his drivers license". Just because Jordan is old enough to have his license does not necessarily mean he does.

Subjective and Objective Claims

When I was in my Public Speaking class last semester, me and one of my friends would always argue about basketball because he liked the Lakers and I am a Kings fan. The claim I would always make, which was a subjective claim, was that "The Kings would have won the 2002 Western Conference Finals against the Lakers if it had not been for the referees". I believe this is subjective because you are able to watch highlights of the game and see how terrible the referees were, and years later, some of the referees came out and said they had been paid to call the game in favor of the Lakers. Though this could also be an objective claim because its just my opinion, I think it is more so a subjective claim because they are many ways to see how this claim can be proven true.
I have hung out with one of my friends a lot this summer, and whenever we do, we always compare our cars that we have. I always tell him that "My car is better than yours". Now this is definitely an objective claim because it is purely my opinion, and it could easily be proven either way that my car or his car is actually the better one.

About Me

Hello, my name is John Krabbenhoft. I am 18 years old, and live in Carmichael, California. I like to sleep and eat a lot. Hanging out with friends is probably what I do most during summer, but I also will be working. I am excited to be able to take an online class for the first time, and will enjoy the challenge. I took a public speaking class last semester, and enjoyed it thoroughly. Hopefully, I will be able to challenge myself to stay on top of the assignments in this class because it will be solely my responsibility to do so. While at San Jose State, I was a civil engineer my first year. Next semester, I will be undeclared, and hoping to apply to the kinesiology department the following semester.