A Little Bit More...

The semester in Comm 41 I have learned so many great lessons that it is quite difficult to pick just one thing that I would like to see further explanation on. Between generalizations and claims there is so much still to learn about the art of communication but one subject I think I could use some more time and explanation on would be about Fallacies. This was a pretty long chapter and lesson to learn, especially because there are so many different types of fallacies and learning when to spot one does taker lots of practice. I believe just being to point out a fallacy is a great accomplishment; knowing that it is a bad argument and then coming to the conclusion that it is an argument that is un-repairable is pretty amazing. Then there all the different types of fallacies that we have to know, were talking about 7+ different kinds of fallacies that we have to know the background of each one. It is a bit confusing in the beginning but once you break it down and get to spend a little more time on them I believe we all can have the art of finding fallacies down pat.

I can't believe this is my last blog of the semester!It really is just now hitting me and it definitely is a bitter sweet moment. This class was a great learning tool and I am really glad I took it. In the beginning I knew it was a challenge but as the semester went along it did get easier just like Professor Perez said! I wish everyone best of luck on their finals and I hope we all have a wonderful summer :)

What I learned...

Man this bog is going to be tough because there is so much that I learned in this course through out the semester I don't know where to begin! Coming into this class I had some previous experience with Communication because I took COMM 40 but with this class being on-line there were some big differences. I had never blogged before this class so that was a great learning experience. Learning about how to create a good argument and discovering when a person is delivering a weak argument is really going to help out later in life. A lot of what we leaned in this class we all can use later on and apply it to our every day lives. I have to commend out Professor Carol Perez for being an amazing teacher even when none of us have met in person. Teaching is already a challenge but when its an on-line course the challenge goes up even further and I believe our professor did an amazing job! We all know communication is key with all aspects of our lives and this class got everyone of us one step closer to preparing us to argue our way into this wonderful but challenging world we live in.

When is a Generalization Good?

In section C of Chapter 14 Epstein discusses when it is ok and when it is not ok to make a generalization. An example that the book gives when it is not ok to make a generalization is in a classroom setting. A teacher makes the statement that there are a few Chinese students in the class and they are all hard working and get great grades. Then the teacher says that they suppose that all Chinese are like that. The group size is way too small to make such a great generalization like this one. This is one way stereotypes are created. The larger the sample sizes the better chances you have of making a good generalization about something or someone. The book tells us that often you can rely on common sense when it comes to smaller numbers. The book also tells us that when evaluating statistical generalizations, you have to assume that the people doing the sampling have looked at enough examples which is pretty much a sure thing when you are dealing with a well know organization or company.

How to Look for the Causes

In Ch. 15 section C talks about how to look for the cause in your argument. it gave an example of a waterfall in a backyard and how they kept losing water to they came up with a list of possible things that could be the problem and by narrowing them down one by one they finally came up with a solution to why their pond was losing water. A car is another similar example, if something is wrong with you car there are always several main things that you go look at first to make sure they are functioning properly. In many instances we cannot really conduct an experiment but we can do an imaginary experiment instead. This is something that we all have done when checking for truthfulness or validity of the problem. The chapter does make a note saying that this method will only help you find the causes if you are guessing the problem among the ones you are testing. I though this was helpful because this method can be put to use in our everyday lives when we need to problem solve. Anything from our cars to an argument we can assess the situation and test each individual problem as we see it.

Mission Critical Website

The Mission Critical Website had a lot of extremely helpful material and in the beginning I was a little overwhelmed but once I took it step by step and looked through the sections I found it was not so bad after all. A few of the sections were Parts of an Argument with sub sections talking about statements, vagueness and ambiguity and inference identifiers. I this part of the site I learned the definitions of a few words such as ambiguity which is a word or phrase is said to be ambiguous if it has at least two specific meanings that make sense in context. I also learned the definition for vague which is a word or phrase is said to be vague if its meaning is not clear in context. Most of this material was things that we learned already or was covered in our books but it was a nice little refresher to get to see it all in one place again instead of having to go through the whole book again.

Cause and Effect Website

After completing all the readings and exercises on the Cause and Effect website I now have a much better grasp on the whole concept. In the several exercises that we had to complete I got to read about Causal Arguments which is an important use when we argue inductive reasoning. The example that they gave had to do with a bicyclist's and several motor vehicles. The whole point to the example is there is an accident and they explain how the many accusations will or will not hold up in court. They also give examples of why or why not they are good arguments. This site also teaches us about Introductions to Induction and Deduction, Analogical Arguments, and last but not least Surveys, Polls, and Experiments. All of these sections gave me more insight on the topic and helped me to further my communicating abilities. I really did enjoy the little mini quizzes at the end. They helped me make sure I retained the information that I just read about.

Vague Generalities

One section of Ch. 8 that caught my eye that has not yet been discussed was the section on vague generalities. This sections discusses the direct ways of reasoning with almost all and arguing backwards with almost all. Using the words "all" and "some" have lots of ambiguity in them but with the skills that we have acquired we are a lot to determine if the argument is valid or not. When we look at the premises it gives us a good reason to believe the conclusion of each even though the conclusion doesn't follow. When using the direct way of reasoning with almost all, almost all are S and P, a is S so a is P; almost all S are P+a is S--> a is P. Arguing backwards with almost all, almost all S are P, a is P so a is S; almost all S are P+ a is P--> a is S. At first this section was quite confusing for me but after i read and re-read the section a few times it all started to click and makes much more sense.

Major Course Assignment

I really have enjoyed working on my part of our second group assignment were we are able to look at a group organization and dig through it looking for certain aspects such as the concealed claims or the social issue that they represent. This also happens to be my part that I am working on for the paper, which is identifying the concealed claims and also identifying the social issue. My group and I chose to look at the organization D.A.R.E which stands for Drug Abuse Resistance Education. I have never had the opportunity to look this closely at an organization before and I have learned a lot along the way. I really like the fact that we have a sheet of things that we are looking for in this project, i think this allows us all to use our skills that we are learning throughout the year and show them during this paper.

General Claims

In chapter 8 of the Epstein book chapter 8 talks about many useful ideas that are helpful with communication. In section A which is General Claims and Their Contradictories they discuss how some arguments can sound valid but when in reality they are not. We find out the uses of "All" and "Some" as well as "No" and "Only". All of these words have meanings when you use them in a statement. An example that we all have heard one time or another in our lives is "All girls are drama queens", now all is meaning all girls, with no exceptions but we all know in reality not all girls are drama queens. I know in my life I have definitely met a few girls who are but I can safely say not everyone is. Another example using a different world would be "Some girls are drama queens". This statement is a little bit better because it is focusing on a small group of girls who are "drama queens". Some means at least one but not all so this is a much better word to use instead of all in this statement.

Effective Communication

In CH. 4 of our Group Communication Book I found a section on "Developing Effective Communication Skills In Organizational Communication". In this part of the chapter it talks about how communication should go about and a few ways that we communicate with each other. In any situation with life you are going to come into contact with someone who is superior to you and making sure you know how to communicate with them is key. There are several techniques that we call Communication Channels and knowing how to use them can be a great tool in life. In the book they introduce us to two channels, formal and informal. Formal channels are the communication paths established along the hierarchical lines of an organization. Informal channels refer to the "grapevine" as well as to unauthorized communication between two or more persons in an organization. A Vertical Hierarchy can be used to show how the lines of communication stream downward. It starts at the top with The Board of Directors, then the CEO's, President, then branching off into four branches you have the vice president of operations, vp of finance, vp of manufacturing, and the vp of sales. There are more branches going down, next are the directors and managers and lastly the workers. I though this section was interesting and could be highly beneficial to me later on in my life. Knowing how to communicate and how to communicate properly is a great life skill to have and use.

Misleading Advertisements

We all have heard of the brand Calvin Klein, first we associated it with clothing but now they sell anything from underwear to cologne for men. But is cloths and cologne the only things that they sell? From the looks of this add sex seems to be the number one priority and jeans are number two. As society grows and the demand for products changes the way we advertise it changes as well. Everyone has heard of the phrase "sex sells" and in this day and age it is very true. The claim being portrayed in this argument is buy Calvin Klein jeans and it will make you feel sexy and desirable. When looking at this argument you have the option of accepting the claim as true, you feeling sexy when you wear Klein jeans, reject the claim as false, or suspend judgment of the claim. Something that we all need to realize is just because we wear this type of clothing there is no guarantee we will feel sexy in them, did we just waste $100 on a pair of jeans that we though would make us feel better about our selves? As a young person living in this society we need to realize that these advertisements are out there to trick us, learning from our own judgments and experiences is the most important tool we can use.

Repairing an Argument

Most times when a person states an argument they make the mistake of leaving an important section out. These arguments are usually repairable but sometimes others are UN-repairable. In Chapter 4 of our Epstein book they explain the proper way to repair an argument. There are three ways techniques you can use to help repair your argument. The first is the argument becomes strong or valid, second is the premise is plausible and would seem plausible to the other person, and third the premise is more plausible than the conclusion. An example of an argument the needs repairing is All little brothers are annoying. So Jane’s little brother is annoying. The claim is that “Jane’s little brother is annoying.” But my argument is still weak because Jane’s brother could be an exception. He could be one of the best little brothers, leaving Jane alone when friends are over and not bothering her when she is trying to study or talking on the phone. This argument could not be repaired because the premise we would need to add still makes the argument weak.

Mentoring from Small Communications Book

In the Small Group Communications Book there is a section in CH. 4 that talks about mentoring and what a mentor is. A Mentor is described as a member of an organization who is usually older and more experienced. A person who is well respected and is a role model to the rest of the group. A person who is known to be less experienced is knows as a Protégé. These relationships between each other benefit organizations by getting things done faster as well as creating a positive and enjoyable working environment. The mentor and protégé but benefit from this relationship, gathering separate but equal information from one another. This relationship depends on a understanding of the roles and characteristics of each member. The mentoring process usually develops through four stages and they are Initiation, Cultivation, Separation, and Redefinition. In each of these stages important lessons are learned about the mentor/protégé relationship. With each stage progress is made and the protégé starts to learn the ropes and come out of the stage of learning and into the stage of teaching someone else, the cycle starts all over again.

Slippery Slope Fallacies

Epstein describes an argument as having a fallacy only if the premises is dubious and no other premises support the conclusion. A slippery Slope fallacy is where the reasoning in a chain of events that lead to them all crashing together down hill. The conditions where at least one of them is false or dubious. an example of a Slippery Slope Fallacy would be "If I fail this test, I'm going to fail this course, and then I will never get into my major, then I will drop out of college. Dropping out of college will lead me to never getting a job, and then I will end up homeless and out on the streets dying alone." This example although extreme shows us how one bad thing leads to another and they all go down hill in a downward spiral. Slippery slopes are something that we hear everyday in the media and in conversation out in public as well. These types of statements can lead to fales accusations. Many people get ahold of wrong information when it comes to these types of statements. When a person thinks of statements like this or they get published for the public the outcome can never be good, someone will always believe it is true when most likely they never are.

Complex Argument Exercise

Exercise #2

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.

Is it an Argument? Yes, this is an argument but not a very strong one.

Conclusion: I believe number number 4 is the conclusion to the argument. "Therefore, I'll be late for class" tells us the outcome of what waking up late did to the student. The other statements just give us some description of what they will do next and some factors that made them late to class.

Additional Premises? Although these premises already given help the argument there could sill be more factors that we as the reader do not know about such as the alarm was set five minutes later, or the clocks in the house were set slow making the student leave on time but actually late on real time. It is always possible to add or find more details to the premises.

Identifying any Sub-Arguments: I would say that numbers 1, 2, 3, and 5 are the sub arguments and they all support claim #4.

Good Argument? In the long run I do not believe this is a very good argument, granted it is one just not a strong one.

This exercise helped me out a lot when it comes to analyzing arguments and digging deeper to understand all the factors that go into one. Before I did this exercise I would never have done something like this with any argument but now I am glad I know.

Dealing with Time Pressures in Groups

When it comes to working in groups, time is always one if the main factors that are against us. We all procrastinate and wait last minute when it comes to projects and class work but there is a way to avoid all of this last minute stress. When working in groups planning and coordinating the work load help with effective decision making. Proper planning is key when you have multiple people working together in a group. An example that the Small Group Communication book gives is a professional corporation is working on team building and they are given a task of moving their twelve members from wooden platform to another with only two other wooden planks. They were given five minutes the first time but with so many people working together at once with so little time they were unable to achieve their goal. The second time they were given no time limit and while all working together and organizing their ideas as well as coming up with ideas and a plan through trial and error the group was able to succeed in their task with only taking twelve minutes. When we are assigned group projects in this class working together and listening to each other can help get the work done without the pressures of time breathing down our backs. Just remember to listen to everyone in your group and come up with a solid plan of action before you jump in to anything.

Whose argument will reign supreme...Strong vs. Valid

Just like testing an argument we have to put our strong or valid statement through three tests. These are very similar to testing an argument, the tests consist of finding a good reason to believe the premises, it must be a valid or strong statement, and the premises has to be more plausible than its conclusion. There are a few key points that will not matter when deciding whether a an argument is strong or valid and they are whether the premises are true, if we know the premises are true, and if the person making the statement thinks it is valid or strong. There are some key words that you may use in your statement such as "maybe" and "really" that give the reader an idea of how the speaker feels about the argument.

An example of a Strong statement is "All San Jose City police cars that I have seen or anyone else I know has seen are white and blue. Therefore all San Jose City police cars are white and blue." This is an example of a strong argument because the premises is true and we know it is true as well as I believe it is a strong argument. Now an example of a valid argument would be "San Jose City cop cars are only blue and white. Therefore, all San Jose city police cars are blue and white." Even though both if these statements say pretty much the same thing one gives a stringer statement than the other.

Testing an Argument

There are three set rules that we use and need to use when it comes to analyzing an argument. The rules are making sure the premises are plausible, the premises are more plausible than the conclusion and that the argument is valid or strong. We are able to use these rules in everyday conversations. When we test a statement you really only need two out of the three tests to hold to analyze your argument. To start off you want to choose the question that can be answered easiest.

An example is "Steve Carell is funny. Steve Carell is on The Office. The Office is funny." Now I am going to use the three tests we learned previously to test this argument. Is the premise plausible? Yes, it is true that Steve Carell is funny and he is on The Office. The premise is more plausible than the conclusion. Just because Steve Carell is funny does not make the show The Office funny too. It all depends on the other actors. Steve Carell could be the only funny actor on the show compared to his other co-stars. However there could be a chance that Steve Carell's co-stars are just as funny as he is and The Office might be one of the funniest shows on TV. There are many factors that can contribute to whether Steve Carell is funny or the show The Office is funny. After analyzing this argument I have come to the conclusion that this is a weak argument because there are so many factors contributing to the conclusion. Your own opinion can come into play as well when deciding if Steve Carell is funny or not.

Types of Group Roles

In the Small Group discussion book there is a section on Types of Group Roles. After reading this it gave me a much better perception on how to delegate the work load properly so everyone contributes equally. A few examples of task roles are Information giver, Information seeker, Elaborator, Initiator, and Administrator. Each one of these roles is important in finishing the project efficiently and on time. There is also another type of roles that can be delegated and they are known as Personal roles which deal with the relationships of the group members. They are called socioemotional because they are not directly related to the work load but more there to make sure everyone is getting along and keeping the group working like a well oiled machine. The names of these jobs are the Harmonizer, Gatekeeper, and Sensor. Now these people are there to keep the peace when there is tension among group members as well as keeping the communication flowing and the ideas running around the heads of all members. This section I believe will come in handy when we all have to come together and work on these group projects. Keeping tension low and spirits high is a great environment to do a group project in.

Ambiguous and Vague Sentences

We hear vague and ambiguous sentences on our day to day lives all the time and they are quite frustrating. There hard to escape whether your watching TV and a commercial come on or waiting in line at the store reading the magazine headlines. One commercial has really stood out to me lately while I have been watching TV and I am sure we all have seen it being advertised, it would be the new "Drive Thru Diet" that Taco Bell is now displaying. There spokes woman claims to have lost 54 lbs. by eating only the Fresco items off them menu when she ate out. When I first say this advertisement I couldn't believe it, there was no way one woman lost that much weight eating Taco Bell food. What they fail to mention on the commercials but to say on there web site is that she lost this weight through a span of two years along with reducing her calorie intake by 500 while also exercising. These adds seem to give a very confusing message as how losing weight is that easy, just eat at Taco Bell and see the pounds melt away...I don't think so. This advertisement is extremely vague in stating how easily it is to lose weight. The commercial must do this on purpose as a ploy to get more people eating Taco Bell’s food just because of the false claims they are making about there new “Drive Thru Diet”.

Subjective or Objective...that is the question

Subjective and Objective claims are similar but different at the same time. A Subjective Claim is a phrase or claim that someone states with out it mattering whether it is true or false. Subjective has to do with your personal feelings and standards, all other people's opinions are put aside. Now an Objective Claim is a phrase or claim that is not subjective or impersonal. Meaning the claim has truth in it and all can agree to the claim.

An example of a Subjective claim that I have heard recently was in a conversation with my roommates. We were all sitting in our living room of our apartment and having a conversation about what food we like and what we don't like. My one roommate Jessica loves seafood and anything to do with it while my other roommate Annelyse and I both hate it. I made the statement "seafood is gross and it smells unpleasant when you cook it". My roommate Jessica disagreed with my statement because it is a personal subjective statement only applying to me.

An example of an Objective claim that I heard recently was in my Health class that I had on Tuesday. Our teacher was doing a lecture on What Health Is and she gave the definition of health saying it is "a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease". This is an objective claim because it is a true well known statement that many people are aware of and live by.

Just Me

Hello All,

My name is AJ and I am a sophomore here at SJSU. I am a Health Science major with a concentration in Public Health. My freshman year I took COMM 40 so I have a little bit of a background in communications but not much. This class is fulfilling one of my GE sections and it is my first on-line course as well so bear with me because its all very confussing! I am really looking forward to our group assignemnts as well as this class in general, I have never been one to blog but this class may change my whole perspective on it and I can't wait to see how it goes. I know it is going to be challenging but thats what school is all about.

I wish everyone luck in this coming semseter!