Chapter 8

What I have learned from Chapter 8 is a direct way of reasoning implemented with general claim words such as no, all, only, and some. These words can be used differently depending on the argument. All would be used to effectively direct reason. For example, all basketball players are quick, George is a basketball player, so George is quick. Direct way of reasoning creates valid arguments. The general claim words such as no, all, only and some could all be used to create valid arguments as well. Another example would be no dogs eat cats, chip is a dog, so he doesn’t eat cats. An example of only would be only the strongest survive, Chris is the strongest, therefore he survives. These words are used to designate the direction in which your argument is heading. It is important to use the right word so you are not misunderstood and your argument is coherent.

Refuting With Bad Arguments

One thing that I have learned in chapter 7 is different ways to refute that make for bad arguments. Some examples stated in the book are phony refutations and ridicule. Phony refutations consist of claims that are weak and add false premises to the argument. The book states that a person may also follow a slippery slope and mistake it for reducing to the absurd. When a person follows a slippery slope, they add one false premise that leads to the next. Another way to refute that makes for a bad argument is using ridicule. Although for some it may sound appealing and amusing, it makes for a very illogical way of arguing. It also is a weak and useless way to reason. One example would be when my friend and I were arguing whether or not we should have our friends stay at my place for the night or his. So we were stating the costs and benefits of each place and I stated that my house was small, cozy and it was more comfortable. My friend decided to use ridicule to sway his argument by saying, “If you want to stay in a small cramped apartment that you can barely move in, then stay at his place.” Although it may sound reasonable at first, he just tried to win the argument by ridiculing my own argument and belittling my apartment.

Chapter 7

Chapter 7 is very informative chapter in a sense that it is basically the introduction to counter arguments during a debate type argument. In this chapter I learned about raising objections and refuting an argument. When we raise an objection, we are trying to convince others that the argument that was raised by our opponent is a faulty one. We show how the argument is weak, such as stating whether or not it is subjective or showing whether the argument is dubious or not. I also learned in this chapter that there are two ways of refuting an argument. There is refuting directly and refuting indirectly. Refuting directly consist of the method that we show the premise is dubious, show the argument to be weak, and show the conclusion to be false. (pg 149) We use indirect refutation in the case that we cannot exactly show that the premise is false but we can sense that the argument is weak or faulty.

Chapter 6

What I have learned from Chapter 6 is considering alternatives such as compound claims and the contradictory of a claim. I also learned about conditional and their contradictories. A compound claim is a claim that is compiles 2 or more claims and is seen as just one claim. For example, “I can either go to school or stay home and sleep.” The indicator word would be the word or. Within each of these claims consists of alternatives, which are all claims that make up a compound claim. The contradictory of a claim is a claim that is the complete opposite of another claim. For example a claim would be “I am a Warriors fan.” The contradictory of this claim would be “I am not a Warriors fan.” Conditional claims are claims that are perceived as if and then statements. For example, “If I don’t go to school today, then I will fail my quiz.” The contradictory of a claim instead would be an if, but not then. For example, “If I don’t go to school, I still won’t fail my quiz.” Knowing how to use compound claims and conditional claims will make your arguments much more effective and will help you see weak arguments.

Mistaking the person for the argument

The example that I am writing about is mistaking the person for the claim. Basically this means that you are disregarding the claim not because of invalidity, but because you are judging the person who said it. One example would be to not give tax breaks to Americans just because Barack Obama signed the initiative and because he is a Democrat. Mistaking the person for the argument is definitely something that we see in politics. It is definitely something that hinders the growth of our nation because politicians are making biased decisions based solely on whose party is on whose. Many Democrats would believe that tax breaks would be very beneficial to the nation, but Republicans would vote against it because Democrats would propose it. This is an illogical way of reasoning. Politicians would reject the argument solely on one reason; because the other side is getting a bit stronger. This really affects the nation as a whole because people in power make decisions based on mistaking the person for the argument.

Advertising and the Internet

Advertising on the internet is important for sites such as ebay, amazon, and craigslist are utilized by regular people who want to get rid of regular things. In my post, I will be talking about craigslist and how I usually go about evaluating ads. I've been dealing on craigslist for about 2 years now, both buying and selling various items. I have become an expert at seeking fake ads, scammers,and spammers on craigslist. I regularly search for cars on craigslist, because I usually finds good deals on cars because I don't have to deal with dealers and I could make really good deals. So recently I've been searching for cars, specifically a camaro. I recently saw this ad with a camaro that seemed too good of a deal. "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is" as the old cliche says. The first claim that I rejected for this ad was that it was a camaro z28, as the title says. This claim contradicts a claim that has been made by a visual in the ad. I have reason to believe that this car is not a Z28 model, but rather an SS, as the pictures say. I am relying on personal experience with this ad because I've come across many ads like this before and I've owned many cars like this. The second claim that I rejected was that this car is being sold in San Francisco, as the title says. I use my background of Kelly Blue Book to analyze the price that this owner has set. He is selling this car for $3,700, when in actuality this car could be sold for around $10,000-$12,000. This fact brings me to the conclusion that the owner is very desperate or that this online ad is a fake. The likelihood of this being a fake ad is much greater because who would give up $7,000? Another detail I noticed is the picture looks like it is in a farm setting, and the ad is placed in San Francisco. This is an example of a Nigerian scheme in which the person who posts the ad makes an agreement with a person. That person sends a check to the seller and the seller promises to ship the car to that person. As stupid as it sounds, a lot of people fall for schemes like these. I would usually email people and gauge the situation to see if they actually want to meet in person. If they don't, then usually the deal is not legitimate. Using personal experience as well as other reputable sources such as kelly blue book, I am able to see if the claims that people make in online advertisements are true or not.

Repairing Arguments

I go to school. In class I take notes. Therefore I receive an education.
This a solid argument that needs minimal repair. Although the argument is sound, there are a few minor flaws with this statement. After the statement “I take notes”, the argument immediately jumps from taking notes to receiving an education. Receiving an education means different things to different people. To some, receiving an education could mean memorizing and passing their weekly quiz. To other, receiving an education could mean receiving their diploma. So you can see the one faces when addressing this argument. Adding a little more specificity and tweaking the argument will make the argument stronger. For example, “I got to school and take notes. These notes help me learn everything and pass the classes I need to graduate. Therefore I receive an education.” This statement is more plausible and sound. This example addresses the questions that I had earlier about what receiving an education means. Instead of making the reader decide what receiving an education means, you are telling them. If you pay attention to detail and add more supporting premises then you will definitely beef up your argument and repair any type of holes in your argument. Of course the argument isn’t perfect, but you will see the flow of your ideas and they will transition evenly, so that everyone sees your disposition. The premise is more plausible than the conclusion and would seem plausible to any reader reading it.