Assignment 2

I think that assignment 2 is more useful than assignment 1. I felt that my group got more things accomplished. We all cooperated and things went really well. We met up and met up online. We actually used communication skills this time around. Everyone has been emailing back and forth to get the paper done. I feel proud of my group. We are doing the paper on PETA, which is an organization to help and save animals. No one or thing should hurt any type of animal; they have feelings too. I think this assignment is more useful than the first one because we have to find fallacies, concealed claims, and reasoning. This makes me understand the concepts a little better. Since we need it in the paper, we obviously have to know what it means, and now I know what it means. I felt that this paper is a bit easier because we do not really have to do much research. My group used one website to analyze the organization. I enjoyed writing assignment number 2 with my group.

Chapter 8

In chapter 8, I find that general claims and their contradictories are interesting. General claims are how we assert something about all or part of a collection. Claims usually starts with the words like: all, some, some are not, and no. With general claims, contradictory claims also tags along. Contradictory words are: some are not, not every, not even one, all are not and more. It’s easy to make general claims, but a bit hard to contradict. There are many ways to say a general claim and there are also many ways to contradict the claims. So today in my Asian American Studies class, we’ve talked about the role of women. Some say “all women are to stay home cook, clean, and watch the kids”. One student contradicted the claim and said, “Not every women are housewives”. Also, in this chapter, I find that drawing diagrams can help us decide if an argument is valid.

More discussion....

Since the semester started, I feel that I have learned quite a bit in this COMM 41 class. Though it is an online class, I still learned things. I think I need more information on repairing arguments. Like I get it, but then again I kind of don’t. The book says a repairing argument means “given an (implicit) argument that is apparently defective, we are justified in adding a premise or a conclusion if it satisfies all three of the following: 1. the argument becomes stronger or valid. 2. The premise is plausible and would seem plausible o the other person. 3. The premises are more plausible than the conclusion (Epstein 62).  I also think I need more discussion on strong and valid arguments. So I was doing some research on it and the site says “A valid argument is one in which it is not possible for the conclusion to be false if the premises are true”. A strong argument, then, is an “invalid argument in which is likely that the conclusion is true, given that the premises are true. Unlike validity, strength can come in degrees”. EX Premise: 99% of Americans are afraid of snakes. Premise: Jane is an American. Conclusion: Jane is afraid of snakes”

( http://www.hss.cmu.edu/philosophy/harrell/writingvocab.html)

Interesting 411

Contrapositive’s are interesting in chapter 6. Contrapositive’s are claims that are equivalent to one another if each is true. “The contrapositive of If A, then B is If not B, then not A. A claim and its contrapositive are equivalent” (EPSTEIN 124).  I have been using this type of claim for a long time and I never knew. I never had a teacher with me 24/7, pointing out what types of sentences I was using. Everyone uses contrapositive but they do not know. Now you know. This book tells it all! An example of contrapositive is:

If I go to prom, then my friends will go to prom.

If my friends went to prom, then I went to prom.

Another example is that is easier to understand contrapositive is via contrapositive.

If you pass I behind the wheel test, then I will get my license.

If i just got my license in the mail, then I passed my behind the wheel test.

Chapter 7

Chapter 7 is all about counter-arguments. In this section, I have learned about raising objections. What that means is that it is a “standard way to show that an argument is bad” (EPSTEIN 147). So we are questioning one’s statement or question. The book gives an good example of a raising objection. An example of mines is

Me: Let us go to the mall because I need more sweaters!

BFF: You have a lot already.

Me: Yes, but i need more to keep me warm in the winter.

BFF: You need to save your money for your car. You have no money to spend and plus you already have a closet filled with sweaters.

Here I have constructed an example of a raising objection. BFF would always object my claim.

Another thing I learned in this chapter is, refuting an argument. Direct ways of refuting an argument is to “show that at least one of the premises is dubious, show that the argument isn’t valid or strong, and show that the conclusion is false” (EPSTEIN 149). If the sentence is unrepairable or has a false conclusion, then the sentence is refuting an argument. 

Chapter 6

I learned a lot about compound claims in chapter 6. “A compound claims is one composing of other claim but which has to be viewed as just one claim” (EPSTEIN 113).  So I have been using compound claims all my life, ever since I learned how to write. A compound word consists of one word that can link two claims to make a compound. The word “or” makes a sentence a compound sentence. An example of a compound claim is:  should I get the black dress, or the red dress? I also learned in this chapter about modus ponens. This is a type of reasoning that if A, then B +A=B. An example of this is, if Rocco barks, then Jayden will wake up. A= Rocco barks, B= Jayden will wake up. It is an easy concept to learn. The opposite of this type of reasoning is called modus tollens, If A, then B+ not B, so not A.