The Principle of Rational Discussion principle is when we assume that the other person who is discussing the subject with us knows about the subject under discussion, is able and willing to reason well, and is not lying.
You're going to pay 50 dollars to go to the San Jose State University football game? Didn't you realize that our team is the second worst team in college football?
Analysis: Where is the argument in this statement? It is just to questions.
If you were the one in this argument, you would think that the speaker is trying to convince you not to buy a ticket to the football game. The speaker is giving a reason why not to buy a ticket to the football game because they are so horrible.
The argument sounds quality but something is missing. A glue statement could be inserted in there stating that you are just wasting your money because you are watching a bad brand of football.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Content Fallacies
Bad appeal to common belief (or practice):
If (almost) everyone else (in this group) believes it (or does it), then it's true (good to do).
This fallacy means to me that if a certain group of people believe in one common idea, belief, or practice and actually go through and show there belief by doing it that it is more than likely true or good idea to do to this certain belief.
An real world example of a bad appeal to common belief can be religion. Many religions do many things that alot of people don't understand and because there is a certain group of strong followers, they will do what there group believes and practices. An certian example of this is in Lent in the Catholic religion. They practice this belief to give up a certain habit for 40 days even though many people don't believe in it or understand it.
If (almost) everyone else (in this group) believes it (or does it), then it's true (good to do).
This fallacy means to me that if a certain group of people believe in one common idea, belief, or practice and actually go through and show there belief by doing it that it is more than likely true or good idea to do to this certain belief.
An real world example of a bad appeal to common belief can be religion. Many religions do many things that alot of people don't understand and because there is a certain group of strong followers, they will do what there group believes and practices. An certian example of this is in Lent in the Catholic religion. They practice this belief to give up a certain habit for 40 days even though many people don't believe in it or understand it.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Complex Arguments for Analysis
Question 2
I'm on my way to school. 1. I left five minutes late. 2. Traffic is heavy. 3. Therefore, I'll be late for class. 4. So I might as well stop and get breakfast. 5.
Argument: Yes, there is an argument.
Conclusion: Whether or not I stop for breakfast I will be late, therefore I should stop.
Additional premises needed? To justify why stopping for breakfast and being more late to school is a good idea, would be to explain that I won't be missing much in the first half an hour of school therefore it is fine. I would put this in between the 4th and 5th sentence.
Identify any subarguments: All of the arguments don't have to do with each other which come together to make the argument.
Good argument? I feel like this person is making an good argument because they lay out there reasoning for why they are doing this but I think that it isn't smart to do this because you shouldn't make yourself even more late to class.
I thought this exercise was useful because it allowed me to break down a response and go through and truly think about what is considered an argument, conclusion and subarguments and determine whether it was solid or nit.
I'm on my way to school. 1. I left five minutes late. 2. Traffic is heavy. 3. Therefore, I'll be late for class. 4. So I might as well stop and get breakfast. 5.
Argument: Yes, there is an argument.
Conclusion: Whether or not I stop for breakfast I will be late, therefore I should stop.
Additional premises needed? To justify why stopping for breakfast and being more late to school is a good idea, would be to explain that I won't be missing much in the first half an hour of school therefore it is fine. I would put this in between the 4th and 5th sentence.
Identify any subarguments: All of the arguments don't have to do with each other which come together to make the argument.
Good argument? I feel like this person is making an good argument because they lay out there reasoning for why they are doing this but I think that it isn't smart to do this because you shouldn't make yourself even more late to class.
I thought this exercise was useful because it allowed me to break down a response and go through and truly think about what is considered an argument, conclusion and subarguments and determine whether it was solid or nit.
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Strong Versus Valid
An argument is considered to be strong if there is anyway or possibility for the presimes of the argument to be true and its conclusion to be false. An argument is considered to be weak if it is possible and not unlikely for the basis of the argument to be true and its conclusion to be false. An valid argument is if there is way for the premises to be true and for the conclusion to be false at the same time.
Strong argument: I can shoot a basketball. You can dunk a basketball. We will play basketball.
Valid argument: I cleaned the whole house last week for the both us. Therefore, it's your turn to clean the house this week.
These are examples of a strong and valid argument that show what the reasoning can be for arguments.
Strong argument: I can shoot a basketball. You can dunk a basketball. We will play basketball.
Valid argument: I cleaned the whole house last week for the both us. Therefore, it's your turn to clean the house this week.
These are examples of a strong and valid argument that show what the reasoning can be for arguments.
The Test for an Argument to be Good
For an argument to be good:
1) The premises must be plausible for its reasoning.
2) The premises have to be more plausible than what the conclusion is.
3) The argument is valid or strong or both.
Jeff(to his GM): When I signed my contract, it was stated I would receive a bonus in my contract for having over 70 tackles by the end of the regular season and I have 78 tackles only 12 games through the season. Also, it would be doubled if I had more than 8 sacks and I have 9 sacks already. Therefore, I am entitled to my bonus because of my performance so far.
Analysis: The argument is plausible because that was what was stated in his original contract which in writing states that he is entitled to his bonus. The premises are more plausible than the conclusion because it is in writing it is considered to be a very strong argument that he will win.
1) The premises must be plausible for its reasoning.
2) The premises have to be more plausible than what the conclusion is.
3) The argument is valid or strong or both.
Jeff(to his GM): When I signed my contract, it was stated I would receive a bonus in my contract for having over 70 tackles by the end of the regular season and I have 78 tackles only 12 games through the season. Also, it would be doubled if I had more than 8 sacks and I have 9 sacks already. Therefore, I am entitled to my bonus because of my performance so far.
Analysis: The argument is plausible because that was what was stated in his original contract which in writing states that he is entitled to his bonus. The premises are more plausible than the conclusion because it is in writing it is considered to be a very strong argument that he will win.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)