Thursday, September 30, 2010

Repairing an Argument

Example Argument: There are a lot of gray clouds outside. So it's going to rain today.

Analysis: What would make this argument strong or valid is knowing the weather from something like the news or newspaper or actually feeling some rain drops. If left as is, it would be a very weak argument because gray clouds do not necessarily mean that it is going to rain. It could just be a really cloudy day. If the argument said, "There are a lot of gray clouds outside. The weather report said that there is a 100% chance of showers. So it's going to rain today." then the argument would be good because of that extra premise. The first premise about the gray clouds could therefore be removed as the second premise would suffice.

"The weather report said that there is a 100% chance of showers. So it's going to rain today.", would be the better, stronger argument.

Saturday, September 18, 2010

Practice Mentoring

In Chapter 4 of "The Essential Guide to Group Communication", the authors talk about the importance of mentors in groups. Mentors are usually older and more experienced than other members, and can offer knowledge and wisdom that no one else in the group or team can offer. Proteges benefit from that knowledge and are able to grow, develop, and/or learn at a faster pace. The relationship between those two types of group members relies on each member understanding his or her role in the group. The mentor must be willing to teach, while the protege must be willing to learn. Both sides must make the effort for each other in order to accomplish their goal.

I found this information useful because all of us are mentors and proteges depending on the situation. When it comes to trying to learn something, I have to be more open-minded. Meanwhile, I have to be more patient whenever I teach something to someone. Also, the four stages in a mentoring relationship (initiation, cultivation, separation, and redefinition) showed me that being a mentor is not an overnight thing.

Friday, September 17, 2010

Mistaking the Person (Group) for the Claim

This fallacy basically states that a person's argument is more than likely to be assumed as false or a lie. Although the argument may be true or valid, that person's claim is mistakenly thought of as an invalid argument. This may be caused by that person having a low credibility when it comes to similar types of claims he or she has made previously, such as a person who has lied about something in the past or someone who was wrong about an argument they made.

My example of this fallacy occurred while I was in high school. One of the girls at my school hit her head somehow and supposedly got amnesia. It turns out that she didn't really have it, but acted as if she did for some odd reason, probably to gain attention from everyone. She later admitted to not having amnesia and said that nothing like that would happen again. But, whenever she says there is something wrong with her, like and illness or an injury for example, people automatically assume she's faking it again even when she really is sick or hurt. Even though she may really be under the weather or in pain, some assume that she is lying about her ailments again.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Complex Arguments for Analysis

For this exercise, I chose to do example #1.

My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the cars in his yard (1). People do not like living next door to such a mess (2). He never drives any of them (3). They all look old and beat up and leak oil all over the place (4). It is bad for neighborhood, and it will decrease property values (5).


Argument: Yes


Conclusion: My neighbor must be forced to get rid of his old and beat up cars since he does not use them, and they negatively affect the rest of the neighborhood.


Additional premises needed?
If the neighbors don't like living next to his mess, and if he never drives any of those cars, and if they look old and beat up, and if it will lower property values, then the cars are a problem to the neighborhood.


Identify any subargument:
Premises 2 and 4 support 5, while 3 is independent.
If people do not like living next to that mess, and if they look old and beat up and leak oil all over the place, then it is bad for the neighborhood and will decrease property values.
All of the premises support the conclusion, 1.


Good argument?
All of the premises seem plausible. The argument is valid if all of the premises are true. Though the neighbor may not like it, it is best for the neighborhood for the cars to be removed from the area.


I found this exercise useful and helpful because it helped me understand how to analyze complex arguments.  I was able to break down the argument of each section.  Simple examples such as this is helpful to me because I am a visual learner, so I need visual examples like this.  I have a better understanding of how to write and understand complex arguments.

Saturday, September 11, 2010

Types of Leadership

From past experiences on basketball teams, I've noticed that leadership is hard to explain, and even harder for most to incorporate into their own groups or teams. What I personally did not know was that there were different types of leadership, each with their pros and cons. The four types of leadership listed by O'Hair and Wiemann are: authoritatian, consultative, participative, and laissez-faire.

Authoritarian leadership is when one person or a small group of people take charge of the entire team or group without any real input from the others. In this case, the happiness of the group is sacrificed for quicker decision making since the choices rest solely on one party.
Consultative leadership is more like a democracy. These types of leaders utilizes any and all input from the other group/teammates. Although the people's voices are heard, there are some negatives. For instance, there often is a lack of authority and/or discipline with this type of leadership.
Participative leadership involves a leader (or leaders) that serves as a guidance or facilitator for the group. Leaders with this type of leadership are sort of like a point guard in basketball. Decisions do take longer to however.
Lasissez-faire Leadership involves no real leadership in terms of guidance or authority. It is basically an entire group leading equally amongst themselves.

Friday, September 10, 2010

Strong Vs. Valid Agruments

Strong arguments usually involve an opinion or impression from an individual's perspective. The premises may be true. However, the conclusion may or may not be the truth. An example of this is if I were to say that some items at Wal Mart are cheaper than at Target. Therefore, Wal Mart has better prices than Target. It is true that there are things that are less expensive at Wal Mart than at Target. On the other hand, you could say the exact opposite, which makes the conclusion not true.
Valid arguments have no judgment involved and are true. Both the conclusion and the premise must be true in order for an argument to be valid. My example: Eating too much candy can lead to cavities. Therefore, cavities are preventable by limiting the consumption of sweets. The example is valid because both the conclusion and the premise are true.

Thursday, September 9, 2010

The Test for an Argument to be Good.

Example: Only the greatest teams in the NFL win Super Bowls. The San Francisco 49ers have won a total of five Super Bowls. Therefore, the San Francisco 49ers are one of the greatest teams of all-time.

Tests for Good Arguments:
1) The premises are plausible.
          It is true that only great teams are able to win a championship in the NFL or at any level in any sport for that matter. There have only been a total of 44 champions in league history. Although they have not been as competitive in the last decade as they were in the past, the team's accomplishments compare to only a few other teams in the NFL.

2) The premises are more plausible than the conclusion.
          Some argue that other teams are better all-time than the 49ers. For example, the Dallas Cowboys have won just as many Super Bowls, and the Pittsburgh Steelers have won a league best six Super Bowls. The lack of recent success have also hurt the 49ers' legacy. Despite that assumption by some, it is hard to argue against the fact that the Niners have had more success than most. The premise that only great teams win Super Bowls is more plausible than the conclusion stated because mediocre teams just don't have enough talent and chemistry to win it all. In fact, there haven't been any average teams that wound up winning a title.

3) The argument is valid or strong.
          The argument is true that the 49ers are one of the greatest franchises in NFL history given their number of championships and the fact that they are only one of eight teams ever to repeat as champions. They probably are not the greatest team of all-time since that is arguable.

Friday, September 3, 2010

Pick one concept from the reading: Prescriptive and Descriptive Claims

A prescriptive claim is basically a claim that states what should be (Epstein, pg.24). Usually, these types of claims involve a sense of judgement like whether something is right or wrong, known as a value judgment. Because prescriptive claims involve judgments, they almost always also involve some sort of opinion. Descriptive claims, on the other hand, describe what actually is. Essentially, these types of claims are factual to some degree.

Prescriptive claims seem to spark some debate when discussed amongst peers. True, there are some claims that most people can agree on. But typically, prescriptive statements express a person's feelings and values which may or may not be the same as another person.

Personally, I think that descriptive claims are the cornerstone of any prescriptive claim. Without what actually is, there cannot be any opinionated statements.

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Describe A Vague Sentence Or Ambiguous Sentence

"Can you do this right now?!"

My mom constantly orders me to do things for her.  The problem is, she is never clear about what exactly she wants me to do.  For example, right when I get home from school or work, she asks me questions like, "Can you carry the thing for me?"or "Go over there and get something for me." She acts as if I know what she means and gets mad when I do something different from what she asked. Even when I try asking for specifics, my mom replies vaguely by saying phrases like "you know". Her questions and orders are vague because they are not clear enough for me, nor anyone else for that matter, to understand or comprehend. It would be easier for me or anyone else if she asked me things like, "Can you hand me the brown sugar in the cabinet above the sink?" or "Could you go to the garage and get me a bottle of water?" Although I point this out to her from time to time, she still goes back to her vague demands.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Subjective and Objective Claims

Subjective claims are statements/facts that are usually expressed by one's only opinion and judgement. For example, my boyfriend and I were talking about my favorite pop icon, Lady Gaga.  I personally love Lady Gaga because she is inspirational, her songs are phenomenal, her performances are always different and astonishing, and she is very innovative.  Other the other hand, my boyfriend thinks Lady Gaga's songs are also great, but he thinks that her personality is unusual, her outfits are outrageous, and she is not what a popular singer should be like in this contemporary world. That is why my boyfriend does not really like Lady Gaga as much as I do. Both my opinion and my boyfriend's opinion are subjective because it is based on our own view or what we think is precise or normal.

Objective claims are statements that are based on the sources of facts.  For example, my friend and I were talking a couple days ago about how Toyota and Lexus have similar car models.  She was wondering why they were alike.  So we both searched through the web and found out that Toyota actually owns Lexus.  Lexus is more luxurious than Toyota is.  That would be considered an objective claim because the claim that Toyota and Lexus are similar is factual due to their affiliation with each other.