Repairing Arguements

Argument:  You need to get to bed early.  You have two midterms tomorrow. 

Analysis:  The unstated premises that needs to be stated for this to be a valid argument would be, “Getting extra sleep can help you focus better and do well on tests”.  Also, it would help if the word “need” were changed to “should”.  The only thing that is absolutely true is that fact that you have two midterms tomorrow.  Another thing that could be added would be the statement that you do indeed want to do well on your midterms.  However, this is such an obvious standard that it does not even need to be stated in order to be understood.  Even without all of this extra add-on stuff, this argument is OK because the premises is more believable than the conclusion, and there is that one major unstated claim that you do want to do well on your test.  Assuming that the reader assumes this, the argument is believable even before repair, but better with. 

Online Advertising

Below is a link to an advertisement many of you have either seen or seen something very similar to.  Free ringtones sent right to your phone! It features a cute picture of a puppy listening to ear phones.  The cute puppy distracts from the fact that there is no actual information about where these ringtones are coming from, only a flashing button that says “free download, click here!”  If you didn’t know any better,  this would seem like a great deal, but anyone who frequently surfs the web would know better than to click on the button.  Sites like this that don’t give you any information or any sort of source to fall back on usually do one of two things- inject virus’s into your computer or convince you to give them some sort of contact information (or worse- credit card information), and then make your life a living hell by spamming you and forcing you to have to cancel your cards because there is no number or organization to call to retract your participation.  Stay away from sites like these!

http://adserver.adreactor.com/servlet/click/zone?zid=31&cid=1313&mid=2290&pid=53&default=false&random=98613918&timestamp=20100929152815&test=false&custom1=&custom2=&referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fairmp3.net%2Fsubparts%2Fad2iframe.php%3Fa%3D%26t%3D&redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bearshare.com%2Fdownloadmusic%2F%3Fappid%3D133

Relevancy

Relevance is very important to arguments.  It really weakens an argument when the arguer says something that does not support what they are trying to prove.  It makes it seem like they do not know what they are talking about, that their point isn’t valid, and that they are trying to insert fluff to distract the listener and to get them to agree with them.  My friends do this all the time when they are trying to convince me to go do something with them that I might not want to do like go grocery shopping or do chores.  They will just say stuff for fluff like, “Oh you had class this morning, you should come with me,” and I will look at them and say “Why in the WORLD does that matter.”  They just say whatever they can in order to persuade me, no matter if it makes sense or not.

Communicating in Organizations

I feel like I may have more experience than the average college student in communicating in social organizations.  I can think of different examples of groups I have been in that are either very open to voicing ideas and change and on the other end very steady and unchanging.  When I was young, I grew up on a court where there were 14 kids.  We formed a club which we called the “KC Club” and what we did pretty much consisted of having lemonade sales in order to raise enough money to buy slip n’ slides, since every time we bought one we almost instantly broke it.  In this organization, if anyone had any ideas of how we could come up with a way to make any sort of money (we did resort to trimming weeds out of driveways once), they were immediately brought up, discussed, and almost always put into place.  Another organization that I am a part of where communication is encouraged is my sorority.  They always welcome suggestions to change, although the system they have set up is way more tried and tested than my KC Club days, so change is less likely to happen.  Going to church it is even less appropriate to suggest change.  If you were to raise your hand in church and suggest you change a hymn or the way a prayer is done, people would just laugh at you.  There are ways to make suggestions like that, but it is appropriate to know which forum it is most appropriate for bring your suggestions to in each organization, and if you are not sure or new to ask.  That way your ideas can be best heard and considered. 

Arguements Exercise

(1) I'm on my way to school. (2) I left five minutes late. (3) Traffic is heavy. (4) Therefore, I'll be late for class. (5) So I might as well stop and get breakfast.

ARGUEMENT:  yes

CONCLUSION: I should stop to get breakfast on my way to class.

ADDITIONAL PREMISES NEEDED: Something saying, if I am late to class, I automaticly get zero credit. Or something that justifies being later to class.  It is obvious to most people that 2, 3, and 4 are not good enough reasons to come even later to class. 

IDENTIFY SUBARGUEMENT: Independent claims 2 and 3 support 4, which is supposed to support 5.  1 is just setting up background information.

GOOD ARGUEMENT: No, it would need another independent claim to branch the area between me being late (4) and how it is then ok for me to be even more late to class (5). 

Helpful??
I thought these exercises in the book were very helpful, and I actually looked them all over and did them all a little in my head.  It is a lot more difficult to break down an arguement when you did not put it together yourself, because when you make one yourself if you make an error you conciously put it in and then it's not that hard to find or diagnose.  I admit that when I have been doing the reading, I have been skimming over the exercises and most examples unless I am really stuck, but after doing this I will be much more likely to use the examples in the book because it really helped me understand the material more thuroughly.

Test Arguement

The argument I am going to test is “My dad listens to his music really loud. Also, my dad is hard at hearing. He is hard at hearing because he listens to his music too loud.” The first test is to check the premises for plausibility. My dad listening to his music really loud is very plausible and believable, especially if you knew my dad. The fact that my dad is hard at hearing is plausible, but slightly vague because hard at hearing could be maybe he just doesn’t listen to me as well when I am talking to him, or it could mean he is almost deaf. It doesn’t really specify. The second test is to make sure the premises are more probable than the conclusion. I think that the premises are more probable than the conclusion because the hearing damage could have been caused by many other things rather than listening to loud music, although it is still a strong argument. It cannot be valid though because of the fact that saying my dad is hard at hearing is too vague, and also because there are other ways that he could have hurt his ears. This argument is strong.

changing an argument point to make it valid

Arguments are only valid if they include proven facts. Today one of my friends said that she has seen so many Volvos lately, and that it must be the best selling car on the street right now. Just because she said this does not make this a valid argument, it is simply an opinion. I could turn around and say that I have seen a lot of BMWs recently, and argue that since I have seen more BMWs than she has seen Volvos that those must actually be the best selling vehicle right now. Unless you have solid facts to back up your argument, it is not valid. You would be able to argue this if you did some research before, and actually found out that, in fact, Volvos sales had increased dramatically; then looked at sales of other cars and seen that all other car companies were not selling nearly as well. You would have a proven fact, and nobody could dispute otherwise. They could argue with you but it wouldn’t matter because they would have nothing to back their opinion up.

Arguements- Strong vs. Valid

The difference between a strong and valid argument is very subtle, and unless you think about it carefully it may be difficult to tell them apart. A strong argument is persuasive but not necessarily true. For example, if someone were to tell you that they go to college, and all of their friends from college like to wear skinny jeans, therefore all college students like to wear skinny jeans. This is a strong argument because it may actually be true that a lot of college students like to wear skinny jeans based on their observations which are both true. However, it doesn’t take into account the possibility that some people who aren’t their friends might like different kinds of jeans. A more accurate and valid argument to the same affect could be I go to college, and all of my friends from college like to wear skinny jeans, therefore some college students prefer skinny jeans to other types of jeans. By making the result less absolute, you can eliminate the problem of error with your argument, making it true and valid.

Subjective and Objective Claims

Subjective and Objective claims remind me of how critical people are of themselves. People often say about themselves “I am bad at math” or “I look terrible today” making critical remarks about themselves based personal standards. A lot of the time, these subjective claims are not completely accurate because they are completely based on the opinion of the person speaking about themselves. I think subjective claims made about yourself are the most inaccurate because of how critical people are of themselves. A if people were to support these subjective claims with objective claims such as “I got a 42 percent on my math test” or “I didn’t have time to shower today”, then I am more likely to take what I am being told with more consideration. These objective statements are much more true because they are based on impersonal standards, things that can be measured and therefore there is no vagueness about exactly the extent or degree the subjective claim. However, it is more likely that people want to say things with their own twist and you will hear stories about people’s days made out of more subjective claims, because we all love to exaggerate.

Prescriptive and Descriptive Claims

Prescriptive and descriptive claims are interesting to me because I hear them a lot in day to day life. It reminds me of how in my statistics class we are learning about the difference between descriptive and inferential statistics, descriptive being explaining how something is and inferential being using that information to make a projection onto the future. The only difference I really see is that in statistics, the descriptions and projections into the future are more based on actual facts and statistics, versus prescriptive and descriptive claims which are more based on feelings and opinions, especially the prescriptive ones. These claims can be different based on the individual’s morals and beliefs. For instance, if someone were to say abortions is murder (descriptive) so women should choose not to get abortions (prescriptive), this reflects the individuals personal opinion and beliefs and there could be a just as strong descriptive and prescriptive claim supporting the other side.