Week 13 - Post 3: Criteria for Cause & Effect

In chapter fifteen of Epstein’s Critical Thinking, the criteria for cause and effect relationships are thoroughly discussed. The example used in the book is that Spot’s barking is the reason Dick was woken up. I will use this example to explain these criteria. The first necessary criterion is, “The cause happened (the claim describing it is true).” Dick and his neighbor both agreed that Spot barked. Therefore, the cause happened, and the claim describing it was true. The second criterion is, “The effect happened (the claim describing it is true).” Clearly, Dick was woken up by the barking and wouldn’t lie about such an event. If he hadn’t been woken up, he would still be sleeping rather than arguing this point. The third criterion is, “The cause precedes the effect.” It is clear to see that Spot’s barking was the irregular factor that woke Dick up. Therefore, the fourth criterion, “It is (nearly) impossible for the cause to happen (be true) and the effect not to happen (be false), given the normal conditions,” would be true as well. The fifth criterion is, “The cause makes a difference – if the cause had not happened (been true), the effect would not have happened (been true).” Being as how Spot’s barking is loud and irregular, if it had not happened, Dick would not have been woken up at that time. The sixth criterion is, “There is no common cause.” Since there is no common factor that would cause Spot to bark and Dick to wake up, this criterion holds true as well. Because each of these criteria were truthfully met, it is safe to say that Spot’s barking was indeed the cause of Dick waking up.

Week 13 - Post 2: Mission Critical Website

Upon looking at the Mission Critical Website, I was initially a bit confused. But, after further reading, I realized that this website offers a great review for many forms of arguments and reasoning that I have already learned in the class. For instance, I am very familiar with vague and ambiguous sentences, inference indicators, and many of the fallacies at the bottom of the page. While we just went over inductive reasoning, deductive reasoning, and casual argument, the exercises on this page allowed me to practice with these concepts to gain a greater understanding of them. As I read over the fallacies, I realized that I was not familiar with the false equity fallacy or the false compromise fallacy. I learned that false equity occurs when someone hopes to make a good point just by covering both sides of the argument. It also seems that someone would use this form of argument when they lack the solid evidence they need to make one argument particularly thorough. I also learned that false compromise is a compromise that is incorrectly reached due to a lack of information and rushed decision-making. I agree with the website’s statement, “If the issues under debate are too complicated or specialized for us to make an informed decision, then we should suspend judgment, rather than create a false compromise.” I feel that knowing these fallacies will help me detect a greater number of weak arguments in the future.

Week 13 - Post 1: Cause and Effect Website

While I am somewhat familiar with casual arguments, I was not aware of significant differences until reading the Cause and Effect Website. First, I read over the website to gain an understanding of the material. I learned that the effectiveness of a casual argument is dependent on three principles. The website states that these principles are, “how acceptable or demonstrable the implied comparison is”, “how likely the case for causation seems to be”, and, “how credible the “only significant difference” or “only significant commonality” claim is.” The only aspect of these principles that I had difficulty with was the “only significant difference.” For example, the second question in the exercises that asked which reason would be considered the most significant “difference” proved to be challenging for me. While I selected “They all ate from the same bowl”, the answer was actually, “No one else at the picnic ate potato salad.” After reading the explanation, I realized that my answer was falsely based on the commonality of the ill people and not the difference separating them from the other well people. The exercises at the end of the website were definitely helpful in applying these concepts to an everyday situation.

Week 12 - Post 3: Evaluating an Analogy

Being able to evaluate an analogy is important especially when reasoning by analogy. In Critical Thinking, Epstein goes over seven steps that show how to do this. The first step is deciding if the analogy presents an argument. In addition, one must also determine what the conclusion is. The second step is figuring out what two circumstances are being compared. The third step in evaluating an analogy is locating the premises on both sides of the argument. The fourth step is finding the similarities between the two circumstances being compared. The fifth step in evaluating an analogy is answering Epstein’s question, “Can we state the similarities as premises and find a general principle that covers the two sides?” The sixth step is determining if the general principle can be applied to both circumstances. In addition, one must decide if the differences between the two circumstances are relevant or not. The final step in the evaluation process is determining if the argument is strong or valid. If one can successfully apply each of these questions to the example, the analogy will serve as a strong example in the argument.

Week 12 - Post 2: Sign Reasoning

            After reading over the various forms of argument on the instructor’s blog, one of the types of reasoning that I found a bit more difficult to understand was sign reasoning. Upon doing more research on the topic, I found more information on a set of lecture notes from the University of Washington. The notes stated, “Inference says that one thing is a sign of another. It’s usually used in an argument that something is.” In other words, if one thing is present, the other thing is present. For instance, studying for several hours insures that a student will retain information. Furthermore, retaining information insures that the student will do well on their test. When looking at this example as a whole, it is clear to see that the good test score is associated with adequate studying. Without studying, the student would not have gotten such a good test score. Thus, A is only present if B is present. After doing further research, I have a much better understanding of sign reasoning.

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:e4-BvGsHmz4J:courses.washington.edu/com234ce/Day%25204%2520Argument%2520Types.pdf+argument+by+sign&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESi-hDRXJ281aQoAP06DPMoT6KC-5qp1CaGLpVi_KIUn8zqvWo6ANFMH8UyYRujsWvU9_5L0N1CTTOmD_6Kg1p0_ti66gxMPhtCAymmnrtBjDFsJ_SKfFFpSkY6ruENxOGoB1dSu&sig=AHIEtbQS1XwNL_0AxClP06syjbUknxIknA

Week 12 - Post 1: Forms of Reasoning

As mentioned in Professor Perez’s post, there are several forms of reasoning one can use to construct a good argument. Reasoning by analogy is when someone compares the argument in question to a similar argument. An example of reasoning by analogy would be, “The Psychology Department should offer online classes to accommodate more students. The Nutrition Department’s online classes have proven to be very successful in accommodating a larger amount of students.” Another type of reasoning is sign reasoning. Sign reasoning is a form of reasoning in which two objects are so closely related that when one is missing, the other is missing as well. An example of this would be a storm without any rain. Storms do not exist without intense weather conditions like rain, and sometimes even lightening. Another type of reasoning is casual reasoning. Casual reasoning is when the cause of something is altered or changed to prevent its proven effects. An example of this would be a teenager gaining weight from eating excessive amounts of fast food. In order to prevent the weight gain, the teenager would need to stop eating junk food and return to eating healthier foods. Another type of reasoning is reasoning by criteria. An example of this would be, “I know you’re trying to eat healthier. I’m told the salads are very good here.” This statement highly suggests that the person should eat a salad without directly saying that to them. Another type of reasoning is reasoning by example. Reasoning by example is when an example is used in an argument in order to successfully make a point. An example of this would be, “You should go to college. My friends without college degrees had a much harder time finding jobs.” Another example of reasoning is inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning is when someone makes all assumptions about something based on past experiences with that object or circumstance. An example of this would be, “There was traffic last Monday on my way to work. I should leave earlier next Monday because there will probably be traffic again.” Another type of reasoning is deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is when an argument is made and then followed by a premise that deduces the reasoning to one final circumstance. An example of this would be, “College students have to pay tuition. Ryan is a college student. Therefore, Ryan has to pay tuition.” Clearly, each of these arguments can prove to be very effective in the proper situation.

Week 11 - Post 3: Apple Polishing & Appeals to Vanity

In chapter ten of Critical Thinking, Epstein also discusses the emotional appeals known as Apple Polishing and appeals to vanity. Apple Polishing, in itself, is an appeal to vanity. An example of an appeal to vanity would be a make-up commercial. For instance, a commercial for Maybelline mascara will go over the aspects of their product extensively to show their viewers that their product will make them look beautiful. The part of the commercial that talks about how longer lashes will make you look prettier is an appeal to vanity. Discussing the “new formula”, how it separates lashes perfectly, and refuses to clump is an example of Apple Polishing. Apple Polishing allows companies to thoroughly present why their product is the best. Naturally, every detail they mention is not going to be completely true because other companies with the same product say the exact same thing in their commercials. Nonetheless, these appeals help companies succeed in advertising and selling their product.

Week 11 - Post 2: Chapter 10 Exercise #3

Exercise #3: Find an advertisement that uses an appeal to fear. Is it a good argument?

            One type of ad that I constantly see using appeals to fear is the car insurance advertisements for Allstate Insurance. Rather than simply stating that their rates are lower than other insurance companies, they rely on footage of accidents or scary facts about auto-related deaths. I found an example of one of Allstate’s advertisements for teen driving on YouTube. The teenagers are all in cars lined up and driving along a dark road. They look happy at the start of the commercial, but at the end they show the sad look on one teen’s face from the back window of the car as they drive off into the distance. The commercial states, “Every year nearly 6,000 teenagers go out for a drive, and never come back.” They end the commercial by telling their viewers to sign up for Allstate’s “Parent-Teen Driving Contract.” In this case the argument is a bad because a contract with an insurance company is not what is going to make your teenager drive more carefully. Instead, teens should be taught safe driving methods by their parents or a driver’s safety class. However, insurance companies will try to scare parents into thinking that their teen is more likely to get into a fatal car accident if they do not have a service offered by the company.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JAV-_PXSck

Week 11 - Post 1: Appeals to Emotion

In chapter ten of Critical Thinking, Epstein goes over appeals to emotions and how they are used in arguments. He states, “An appeal to emotion in an argument is just a premise that says, roughly, you should believe or do something because you feel a certain way.” There are also several different types of appeals discussed in this chapter. Three of these appeals are appeals to pity, appeals to fear, and appeals to spite. An appeal to pity is an appeal used to get people to do something by making them feel sorry for someone. An example of such an appeal is the ASPCA commercials that show beaten and homeless animals with sad music playing in the background. These commercials are unstated claims trying to get people to donate to the organization by making them feel sorry for the animals shown in the commercial. Appeals to fear are those usually used in advertisements that are commonly used to scare people into doing something or buying something. For example, car insurance companies often show accidents taking place in their commercials before they begin discussing their low rates. Another type of appeal is the appeal to spite. Appeals to spite are those that reject an idea or action in hopes of obtaining revenge. An example of this appeal would be if one employee refused to take their co-worker’s shift because the co-worker refused to take the employee’s shift last week. The appeal to pity is the type of appeal that makes me fall for these types of arguments. When I feel sorry for people or animals, I am much more likely to give in and help them. While these are not proper ways to construct an argument, they usually prove to be fairly successful in advertisements.