Chapter 8

In reading Chapter 8, I learned much about how important certain wording is in a conversation and when making a claim. It also taught me how to raise my awareness to this facts when someone is making a claim at me as well. The first word that can communicate the wrong message is the word “all.” According to it’s definition,  “All means ‘Every single one, no exceptions.’ Sometimes all is meant as ‘Every single one, and there is at least one.’ Which reading is best may depend on the argument.” Many people misuse “all” and use it frequently in daily conversations. Another word that has a vague meaning is “some.” “Some means ‘At least one.’ Sometimes some is meant as ‘At least one, but not all.’” People oftentimes people say “some” and really have no idea what quantity they are actually referring to. It is important to communicate exactly what amount and quantity when trying to make a valid claim.

Loaded Questions

A topic that we have lightly discussed thus far into the reading is the “Loaded Questions” section. The definition of a Loaded Question is “a question that conceals a dubious claim that should be argued for rather than assumed.” To ask a loaded question is to ask a question almost offensively; to the point where the recipient of the question does not know how to respond. An example of a loaded question would be “Are you going to stop smoking before it kills you?” or “When are you going to start listening to me?” After reading about loaded questions on this websitehttp://ksuweb.kennesaw.edu/~shagin/logfal-distract-loadquest.htm, it explained to me that loaded questions also communicate that the speaker is making an assumption when asking the question. Loaded questions can be often times be considered rude and inappropriate, especially in certain settings and locations, as well as who is asking it.

Major Assignments

Now that we have done our second major assignment, I believe it has been beneficial to do a project with a group of people instead of just by yourself. Because this is also an online class, it was nice to talk to other people about your feelings towards the class and if you had any questions. When talking to other people in person about the material in the book it can be easier to understand and section if your struggling with it or have questions in general. Through the projects, I’ve learned much about claims in advertising and all of the flaws that can be out there. There are many different claims and tactics that people can put into their advertising and you would never notice it until you really paid attention and looked at it. Through this assignments I learned to look closer into what you see both in magazines and online.

Chapter 7

While reading Chapter 7, I learned a number of techniques about how to counter-argue. One of the first concepts I read about was explaining the three possible ways to refute an argument. The first one is to prove that at least one of the premises is false. If one of the premises is false, the argument has a slim chance of being strong or valid. The second method is to prove that the argument is weak; usually this is done because the claim is following false premises. The last step is to prove that the conclusion is false. This chapter also explains how to indirectly refute an argument. To indirectly refute an argument, you need to “reduce to the absurd,” which means to first prove that a premise is false, or to prove that all of the premises are false. If all of the premises are false, the claim is obviously false, and under this method, absurd.

Interesting Concept

An interesting concept I read about in Chapter 6 was about “Valid and Weak Forms of Arguments Using Conditionals.” Under this section, it explains that if you are given two true premises, there is no way that the concluding argument is not valid. For example, “If Suzy buys a cat, then she will need to buy cat food. Suzy bought a cat. So she needs to buy cat food.” There is no way that Suzy can buy a cat and not have to buy cat food, so this claim is valid. It is impossible that the premises are false and do not follow the clam. In addition, the example is set up in the form that all valid arguments are set up. The form that the example follows is “ If A, then B. A. So B. This makes sense because if the argument was set up in any other fashion, the argument would most likely be invalid due to the format and context of the claim.

Chapter 6

While reading chapter 6, I learned about how to form various claims and arguments, all of which communicate a different message. One of the first concepts I read about was “Compound Claims and ‘Or’ Claims.” These are claims that personally I know I encounter on a daily basis. An example of an “or” claim would be “Sarah is either going to class or is going to sleep in.” Sarah is going to do either one of these things, but not both. Both options have their own pros and cons, and it’s up to Sarah to make the decision. Another concept I read about in the chapter was about “Contrapositive Claims.” These express two claims, in which both the original claim and contrapositive are true. An example of a contrapositive claim would be “If you go to class, then you’ll get a good grade. If you don’t go to class, you won’t get a good grade.” Both claims are true; but approach opposite scenarios.

Interesting Concept

A topic that was not previously discussed in the reading that I found interesting was in Chapter 4 Section B: The Principle of Rational Discussion. In this section, it gives the rules in order to have a rational conversation/argument, which was insightful. The most obvious yet most helpful statement in this section read “...you might find yourself with someone who wants to reason well but just can’t seem to follow an argument.” I’m sure almost anyone has encountered these types of people, who make pointless claims yet still attempt to argue despite the argument being ineffective. As the book recommends, if you ever find yourself in one of those pointless arguments, it’s better to “agree to disagree” and move on. This section also goes over considering a person who is emotionally invested, overly emotional, and those who “intend not to reason well.” All of these characters are flawed in holding a sufficient and suffice argument.