I found this part of the cause and effect concept very interesting, because in most science research papers it is necessary to support your arguments with statistics and/or published research. Stating an argument like ‘steroids causes change in behavior’ is not enough, you must support your argument by expanding the claim with verifiable data. A regular cause and effect claim argues that one person, thing, or event caused another thing or event to occur; a c/e in population points to evidence to show a greater chance of cause and effect and gives a conclusion using statistical data. ‘People who continue to use anabolic steroids in intervals of _______ (# of dosage) for more than ______ (period of time), run the risk of severe mood alternation and addiction’. This type of argument can be done one of three ways: 1) a controlled experiment using a control group (one group gets steroids, the control group does not) 2) an uncontrolled experiment using representative samples of population groups to determine cause = effect (monitor a group of people who are work/live/ in the same environment – who uses/shows effects and who doesn’t use/show effects) and 3) an uncontrolled experiment using representative samples of population groups to determine how effect = cause (look at individuals who show effects (addiction, behavior) and analyze common thread for occurrence (steroid use, smoking, drinking, etc).
Saturday, November 20
Mission Critical Website
Since both of these websites originate from the same SJSU source I would have to say that both were helpful. However the main Mission Critical homepage offered more information and I liked how the concepts were broken down by categories, some of which we have read in class. Although we had already covered concepts such as: vagueness, ambiguity, premise, conclusion, validity and burden of proof, it was interesting to read the alternate definitions and use of the concepts. In addition, it appeared there were concepts not covered like: universal statements, but this was another term for the concept of general claims using “all” and “none”. There were some concepts that were unfamiliar such as: universal and non- universal syllogisms and a more familiar, but so far undiscussed concept of hasty generalizations – a fallacy that draws a conclusion (or assumption) about a population based on a sample that is not large enough. Example: I read where there have been no reported cases of HIV infection in Liberty Lake. The people of Liberty Lake must be free of the HIV virus. These examples as well as the exercises are always helpful, because they can clarify the concepts, give you detailed feedback for incorrect answers and give you a way to see how the concept is correctly used.
Friday, November 19
Cause and Effect Website
I think the website made more sense after reading the chapter. Reviewing the concept of inductive reasoning was helpful. Inductive reasoning is usually based on information derived from observation or proven by means of experiment. A use of inductive reasoning shows that if I observe that something is true many times, then I should conclude that it will be true in all instances. Key points are: a) make observations b) form conclusions from observation and proven data c) prove conclusions with deductive reasoning (the process of drawing a conclusion by starting with the cause and ending with the effect).
Applying the chapter information regarding normal conditions was helpful in understanding the difference in causal arguments. Things that would “normally” happen are crucial to determining that the causal argument is an “out of the ordinary” incident. I also liked the use of examples in explaining the two rules when dealing with causation: 1) the cause must precede the event in time and 2) even a strong correlation is insufficient to prove causation. In addition, explaining by eliminating reverse causation (things that happened before the incident) or post hoc ergo proper hoc (looking too hard for a cause) you can miss important factors in determining a real case for cause and effect. The exercise was the most helpful part of the website, showing the difference in difference and commonality. For me, examples clarify the concepts and hopefully, help be apply the correct use in my writing.
Saturday, November 13
Not easy to understand - Reasoning by Criteria
Reading through the various reasoning concepts, the one that seemed the most unclear was the idea of reasoning by criteria. I understand that a ‘criteria’ can be a certain measurement, condition, or standard used in making a decision, but I was sure how this was to be utilized within an argument and I felt the suggested website did not provide an adequate example to expand on this concept. Upon further research, it appears that this is actually a claim or statement that suggests or offers a choice; as opposed to having a choice or decision already made.
The job guidelines are clearly defined; its possible that this applicant meets the necessary requirements.
Not: This applicant does not qualify.
The nursing program requires 40 hours of community service work for an agency or organization that you might recommend to your client.
Not: The San Jose Food Bank is an excellent agency.
Chapter 12 - Concept not discussed - Fallacy of Composition
One of the concepts covered in Chapter 12, but not covered previously fallacy of composition. As explained by Epstein, this is “to argue that what is true of the individual is therefore true of the group, or what is true of the group is therefore true of the Individual. Some analogies use a comparison between an individual or family and an agency or corporation. The example provided is: It’s wrong for the government to run a huge deficit – just as its wrong for a family to overspend its budget.
Another website defines this concept as, “an assumption that ‘the whole’ has the same simplicity as ‘its constituent parts’. They provide the following examples for clarification:
"A car makes less pollution than a bus. Therefore, cars are less of a pollution problem than buses."
"Atoms are colorless. Cats are made of atoms, so cats are colorless."
Politicians and the media often argue that the government must balance its budget; similarly a family must balance its budget. It makes the assumption that if a family/household were to continually spend more than its income, it would eventually encounter the same government collapse. The problem with comparing these two entities is that the differences may be so sizable that the analogy does not work; what is good for one is not necessarily good for the other.
Friday, November 12
Chapter 12 - Reasoning by Analogy and Other Forms of Reasoning
Chapter 12 deals with ‘Reasoning by Analogy’ and the various guidelines used in evaluating the strength of the analogy and determining whether it’s a good argument. We find that this category of concept writing is utilized as a motive for drawing a correlation between two legal cases to show a justification or find reasoning for our actions or beliefs. The analogies themselves do not complete the argument, but form a premise foundation for the conclusion. Ultimately, a good analogy argument draws a valid similarity between both sides; it does not show differences. An example of analogy is: Studying is like working out; both take discipline and time, motivation, but the results are a proof of effort. There are various types of reasoning arguments that use specific types of structure. Reasoning by sign, shows the relationship between two or more things; omitting the presence of one, omits the other. Only two things are guaranteed in your lifetime, birth and death. Cause and Effect reasoning, an argument that provides an event or ‘cause’ to show the relationship of another event or ‘effect’. Smoking cigarettes can cause lung cancer; if not to the smoker directly then possibly to a child through second hand smoke. Reasoning by example, an argument that uses an example to persuade or convince. Women should have a mammogram once a year. My friend is a breast cancer survivor because of early detection via a routine breast exam. Reasoning by criteria, is reasoning that compares against established criteria. The medical program has a strict set of guidelines that an applicant must meet before be accepted. Does this applicant have the proper certification? What is their education level? Inductive reasoning: In the winter birds fly south to warmer weather. The weather is turning colder, so the birds will soon be migrating south. Deductive reasoning: All dogs have fur. Sparky is a dog. Sparky has fur. (Not true, because Sparky is a Mexican hairless dog).
Saturday, November 6
Discuss the idea of Appeal to Emotion. Which type strikes you, and why?
Chapter 10 discusses the concept of Appeal to Emotion, which is as way to sway someone into considering a specific point of view or evoke a sense of feeling which persuades them to do something. The chapter also expands on various subcategories - the appeal to fear, the appeal to vanity, the appeal to pity and the appeal to spite - each based on the use of emotionally loaded words to bend audience sentiment. These individual concepts are unique in that a picture can substitute the words required to convey opinion and induce feelings, possibly with the exception of the appeal to spite. Epstein writes, “An appeal to spite often invokes the “principle” that two wrongs make a right”. Or simply said it is an argument that includes an accusation of misconduct that is responded to by a rationalization that others have sinned, or might have sinned.
Jane: I having a dinner party this Saturday and I’m inviting Julie and her husband.
Maggie: Wow, that’s very generous of you, considering they didn’t invite you to their dinner last month.
Jane: You’re right, I completely forgot about that. Well, I guess I will be crossing them off the invite list.
This example uses justification of spite to reverse a decision previously made. It is a bad argument because it assumes Julie intentionally did not invite Jane and that decision is based on implied decent behavior of reciprocation. Spite usually calls into play a moral dilemma.
Friday, November 5
Chapter 10 Exercise #2: An advertisement that uses Apple Polishing
Vanity as defined by Webster’s Dictionary is: an excessive pride in one's appearance, qualities, abilities, achievements, etc.; character or quality of being vain; conceit. Advertisers and product marketers can use a combination of appeal to emotion to suggest that their product quells each emotional argument. A specific example of an appeal to emotion is an appeal to vanity, otherwise known as ‘Apple Polishing’. As Epstein explains, this is “a feel-good argument that appeals to our wanting to feel good about ourselves” (194). An advertisement that I saw recently in a magazine was for Lancome Paris - a facial serum. The product’s advertisement used several appeal to vanity tactics: 1) a side-by-side facial comparison (young and its time-elapsed older counterpart) and 2) statements that are presented as an argument for it use. This is a patented age-reversal cosmeceutical solution that addresses the REAL AGE of the skin with targeted solutions. ’, ‘….it decelerates the aging process. Because you skin should never tell your age’.
Let’s face it, these products would not sell if it wasn’t for some concern based in fear or vanity. The ad uses words (that I have highlighted) that are meant to evoke a sense of prideful concern in a woman’s physical facial appearance. However the argument is bad, because the conclusion is based on a command statement that is subjective. It is based on an assumption that visible aging is shameful and unwanted. In addition, the ad does not provide valid support for ‘age reversal’. Maybe if the product contained an SPF factor, we could justify the use as an skin protection agent, but as it is presented, it’s a high priced moisturizer. A polished waxed apple might look better than a dull organic one, but eating the wax they sell us is unhealthy.
Not already discussed - An Appeal to Fear
Now that I have read through this chapter, it’s amazing how often I see forms of Appeal to Emotion used in advertisements and more recently, political campaigning. The appeal to fear piqued my interest, because of the recent election. I was recently invited to participate in a focus group which asked a panel of registered voters their opinions on proposed gubernatorial commercials. We were shown a number of ads, from both sides, and asked to provide detailed reaction or response. The ads that were not directly aimed at tearing down their opponent were well received, and in most cases, presented an argument regarding the strengths and platform stance of the candidate; while other more negative ads commonly used an ‘appeal to fear’. An appeal to fear, as explained by Espstein, “can be your sole legitimate factor for making a decision”. I believe these advertisements are used more often in campaigning because they bring into question the candidates; experience and motive, honesty and integrity, and they evoke a sense of concern to issues that may directly involve you. Here are a few of the ads we reviewed in the focus group.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)