Week 9 Discussion #3

One thing I found interesting and useful in Chapter 8 was the usage of checking for validity with diagrams. I never thought of seeing whether a claim is valid by making a diagram, probably because I’m not that creative to come up with different methods of learning. Instead, I would always try to figure it out in my head, which sometimes made it a bit difficult to check whether or not the conclusion was true.

A few key factors in checking for validity with diagrams:
- An enclosed area is a collection (similarities, connections).
- If different areas overlap each other, they are in one collection (like in a Venn diagram).
- If neither diagrams overlap, there are no similarities with the two.

Knowing how to figure out the statement’s validity will be easier to decide upon due to tools such as these, especially for visual learners. This method lets the student go through the problem step by step through writing and seeing the premises and conclusion.

Week 9 Discussion #1

In Chapter 8, I found the distinction between the terms “all” and “some” to be useful. All is to be seen as every single one, while some is to be seen as at least one. “Some” statements can have exclusions, but “all” statements include every thing. I find that many people, including myself, use the word “all” in invalid statements on a daily basis to make an exaggerated point.

Example:
Me: All men get too comfortable at the end of the relationship. They stop being thoughtful and end up lacking effort.

I generally make “all” statements based on my experiences. However, I do understand that not all men are of this nature. I cannot say all men are a certain way because not one person is the same as another, obviously. I cannot generalize a behavior for a certain gender or sex. Instead, I should have stated that all the men in my past are of this nature, instead of including every man such as the ones that I do not know personally. Furthermore, I cannot say “all” because the statement above is subjective, causing it to be more of an opinion rather than a fact.

Week 9 Discussion #2

The first major course assignment was useful because it forced students to look into current issues in the news. I, and I’m sure many other students, do not keep up with the news on a daily basis. By doing this project, I was introduced to news that I have not been following that I should have been following. Even more importantly, the assignment forced students to decide how an issue is being portrayed and whether or not it is reliable. This is important to understand because many articles can be bias towards a certain situation.

For my group, we discussed the Knox trial. At first, I honestly did not even know what the Knox trial was. However, looking more into it, I discovered it was about a young woman being accused of murdering her roommate. The article that we had read was reliable because the author merely stated the facts and events of the trial. After doing this project, I noticed the importance of the trial. All the magazines and news channels covered the Knox trial extensively. If I had not done this project, I probably would have not even noticed all these media attention on Knox, causing me to miss out on a well-publicized issue.

Week 7 Discussion #3

The section of necessary and sufficient conditions in chapter 6 was interesting to me. This states, “we say that two claims are equivalent if each is true exactly when the other is” (124). In other words, necessary and sufficient conditions can be compared to a cause and effect statement because one must be true in order for the other to be true. If one is false, the other premise must be false, causing a weak and an invalid argument.

Example:
If people are unable to receive a sufficient income, then they will be incapable of living a quality standard of life.
Contrapositive:
If people are able to live a quality standard of life, then they are receiving a sufficient amount of income.

The contrapositive reinforces the idea that the two claims are related to one another and that both must be true. In order to have a life that has the basic needs such as shelter, food, and clothing, one must have the income to provide those needs.

Week 7 Discussion #2

In chapter 7, I found the section about raising objections useful. These objections show whether an argument is weak or bad.

Example:
Me: We should go shopping tomorrow again. (objection: we already went today)
Friend: You didn’t find anything today?
Me: I did, but I want to go again in case there’s something new so I can find my Vegas outfit. (objection: retail stores may not get inventory every day)
Friend: Tomorrow won’t make a difference.
Me: Well, it might. Some stores and department stores do get new clothing every day. Also, someone might do a return today or tomorrow, and maybe that would be my Vegas outfit. I won’t know until I go again. Besides, we have nothing else to do tomorrow. (answer).

In this example, my friend’s objections were: 1) we already went shopping. 2) the clothes we see tomorrow won’t be different from today. As a result, by strengthening my argument, I gave reasons to these objections such as: 1) some stores do get new clothing on a daily basis. 2) someone might return a potential Vegas outfit. 3) we have no plans tomorrow. Although objections show if an argument is bad, it is important to respond to these objections to show that the argument can be strong.

A second topic that I found useful in chapter 7 was the section about refuting an argument. In order to refute an argument directly, you must show that the premise is doubtful; that the argument is invalid or weak; that the conclusion is false. It is important to do these in order to show that the argument has is false and has an error in its reasoning.

Week 7 Discussion #1

In chapter 6, I learned about compound claims. This is a claim that consists of more than one claim, but is viewed as one claim. Although it has two claims, it is considered as one because the two claims correspond to one another.

Example: Either you will win or I will win the grand prize.

This compound claim states that one or the other will happen. By saying this, the claim gives more of a likelihood of being true since there are two claims contained in one claim.

Another topic that I learned in chapter 6 was the contradictory of a claim. This is where a claim “has the opposite truth-value in all possible circumstances.”

Example:
Claim: Either you will or I will win the grand prize.
Contradictory: Neither you nor I will win the grand prize.

This contradictory of a claim is one most people state incorrectly because they are unaware of how to make the claim negative. In any case of an “either-or” claim, one must change the two terms to “neither-nor” in order to come up with the contradiction of the initial claim.

Week 5 Discussion #3

In chapter four, I found that the unrepairable argument section was useful to me. Unrepairable arguments include the following:

-No argument there.
-Lack of coherence and there’s nothing to add.
-Premise is false.
-The two premises are contradictory.
-Adding the obvious premise would weaken the argument.
-Adding the obvious premise to make the argument strong is false.
-False conclusion.

It is important to remember these factors in trying to repair arguments because if there is nothing to repair, one should not try to repair it. Most of the time, we do try to fix the problem, but sometimes the best answer is to discard the argument altogether. There is no reason in trying to fix something that cannot be fixed. Furthermore, by understanding these unrepairable elements, one can understand that the argument is no good at all. The elements listed above are clear reasons for weak, invalid arguments that emphasize a lack of understanding, cohesiveness, and validity.