Interesting Concept

A concept from this semester that I found useful and interesting was about Loaded Questions. 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?” I found this interesting because I believe our society both asks loaded questions and uses them in advertisements frequently. When asking a question, the person feels obligated and pressured into answering the question in order to please the person who is asking it, instead of being genuine and truthful. In conclusion, asking loaded questions may lead us to hear what we want to hear; however, it may be an untruthful statement.

Likes and Dislikes

My favorite part about this class was having the ability to work at my own pace and learn on my own. Although some points were hard to fully comprehend on my own, it was a refreshing experience to learn on my own time and leisure. I would also gain a better understanding of the complex concepts by reading other people’s blogs, which was incredibly helpful. It was also reassuring to know that others in my section did not fully comprehend a topic that I had difficulty with as well. My least favorite part about the class was the textbook. Personally, I felt the textbook did not do a thorough job at explaining a large portion of the concepts, and oftentimes I had to look up the concepts on the internet in order to gain a better understanding. This can be improved by either swapping the textbook with one that does a more efficient job at explanations or to add another textbook that can help in explaining the concepts in various ways.

What I've Learned

Over the course of the semester, I’ve learned much about critical thinking and how to apply these concepts to every day conversations. To be completely honest, I never knew the structure or proper form of an argument, or how to analyze the argument as valid or weak. Through the course of the semester, I learned how to depict an argument and validate the strength of an argument, as well as when and why to reject an argument. I also learned the importance of structured and logically reasoning, which is a vital key to argument and advocacy. Before this class I was unaware of the importance of supporting evidence and valid claims that should be a part of the argumentation process. I also learned about several fallacies and common misconceptions when analyzing arguments. Without this knowledge, I would be inexperienced in argumentation and have to work much harder to prove my point.

Interesting Concept

An interesting concept I read from this weeks lesson was Reversing Cause and Effect. Reversing Cause and Effect is one of the two way ones can mistake in evaluating a claim. To reverse cause and effect, one mistakenly believes that a cause caused the effect, but really there is no evidence or good reason to believe so. For example, take the tale “An apple a day keeps the doctor away, that’s why I’m never sick.” This is a well known phrase, and the underlying message is if you eat one apple a day, you will be healthy and will not become sick. However, there is no good reason to believe this is true. Of course, eating an apple a day is good for your diet and will benefit your health, but eating an apple will not fight off all of the infection and/or bacteria that one can inherit from another person who is sick. They are most likely never sick because they eat a well balanced diet in general, which as result helped their immune system strengthen, which is most likely why they are never sick.

Mission Critical Website

The topic that I found most interesting on the Mission Critical Website was the Introduction to Conditional Arguments page. The page explains that “if” and “then” are most likely always present in conditional arguments; where as “if” is the antecedent, and “then” is the consequent. Also, the website states that “the first premise established the condition--the relationship between the antecedent and the consequent.” The antecedent and the consequent can also be interchangeable, as long as the claim starts with “if.” For example, a) “If I don’t go grocery shopping, I won’t have food to eat,” and b) “I won’t have food to eat if I don’t go grocery shopping.” Both sentences contain the same words and hold the same meaning; only the wording varies. When dealing the Conditional Arguments, it is important to have both the antecedent and the consequent. If a claim has only one of the two, the validity and comprehension of the claim will be faulty.

Cause and Effect Website

I found the Cause and Effect Website very useful. Although it reviewed Inductive reasoning and Casual Arguments, which we have already read about, it personally helped me comprehend the dynamics of the two. It gives an example about who is to blame for the an accident; a bicyclist who swerved into the traffic lane to maneuver over a parked car, or the car that slammed on it’s breaks to avoid hitting the bicyclist, which the following the car hits due to sudden braking. Because this argument deals with causation, the reading describes the two rules of dealing with causation: 1) “The cause must precede the event in time” and 2) “Even a strong correlation is insufficient to prove causation.” A strong correlation can be faulty because coincidences and reversed causation are still possibilities. These two rules are vital when critically thinking, because there are many variations that are possible, which can alter the situation dramatically. If there is not a fully comprehension of the situation that deals with causation, it is impossible to make an accurate decision. That is why in the example provided on the website, the case that involved bicyclist and the car that had to slam on its breaks had to go to court in order to see who was to blame.

Difficult to Understand

One concept that I found difficult to understand was Sign Reasoning. When you use Sign Reasoning, one assumes that one event is the indicator of another event that is to follow. For example, many people believe that if they walk under a latter, break glass, or have a black cat cross your path, you will have bad luck. There has never been any reliable research done that proves any of these methods liable, however, most of the population believes these old wise tails and go out of their way to avoid doing these things. Also, when people wake up with a sore throat, they automatically assume they are getting sick and are getting a cold. The reasoning of this concept, is due to the fact that when you are sick, your throat is sore; therefore, a slightly sore throat is an indicator that you will be sick soon,. http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=sign+reasoning&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8