Repairing Arguments

When you discuss or read an argument, you must assume that the other person knows about the particular subject indicated in the discussion, that the other person is able to reason well, and that they are not lying. These are the principles of rational discussion, which correspond with being able to repair an argument. When repairing an argument, a premise or conclusion can be added if the argument becomes either valid or stronger, if the premise is plausible and seems to be so to the other person, and that the premise is more plausible than the conclusion.

Here is an example of an argument which needs to be repaired: When Bobby's mom left the list of chores out which Bobby usually won't complete, Bobby ran over and finished his chores right away. So Bobby needed some money. In order for this to be a good argument, a premise needs to be added, such as, "When kids hurry to get their chores finished which they usually do not want to complete, then they probably need money." This statement is plausible and makes for a good argument, because money is motivation for kids who want something and can only get it by making some cash from their parents by doing chores.

Ch.4 Group Text: Superiors and Subordinates

In Chapter 4 of "Group Communication," the author talks about the relationships between superiors and subordinates. This is a type of organizational relationship deals with the communication in a business between managers and employees. Management and its staff have many issues to talk about, including complaints, projects, performance, and what needs to be done to improve the company and its work environment.

As a server trainer at P.F. Chang's in downtown San Jose, I know that the relationship between the superiors and subordinates is very important. There are many issues to cover which our management communicates to me, and I relay our discussion to the other employees. For example, yesterday our trainers and managers had a long meeting going over changes that are going to be made in the restaurant, including many brand new items for our happy hour menu. I was able to try every dish so that our managers could get feedback on how we feel about the new food. Some stragegies were needed in order to make the meeting successful, including approaching the meeting with an open mind, minimizing any distractions from inside the restaurant, and exhibiting active listening skills.

Content Fallacies

According to Epstein, an arugument is considered a fallacy if the premise is questionable and does not support the conclusion. An example of a fallacy that deals with a lack of clarity is the drawing the line fallacy. It is found when a concept is rejected because it is too unclear and if you cannot draw a straight line in order to determine the outline of the concept.

Here is an example of a drawing the line fallacy:
Bob can never be called fat. Bob isn't fat now, however if he eats one more donut, that won't make him go from not fat to fat either. If he eats one more donut after that, this one gain will not either make him go from not fat to fat. Therefore, no matter how many donuts he eats, he can never be called fat.

This argument would be rejected because it is very unclear and a straight line cannot be drawn when trying to figure out the outline of this argument. So, it is considered a drawing the line fallacy.

Structure of Arguments

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

Argument- Yes

Conclusion- Since I am going to be late for class, I might as well stop and get breakfast.

Additional Premises Needed- Yes, additional premises are needed. The person does not give a reason for why they are going to be five minutes late for class in the first place. Even though they will be late, there is not a good enough reason to go ahead and go to breakfast because all that will do is make them arrive to class even later. This shows that there should be a premise added after claim number four so it can be connected to the fifth claim.

Identify Any Subargument- Claims 1,2, and 3 are subarguments which support the 4th claim that traffic is heavy. Claim 4 and the claim that they might as well be very late or miss the class support the conclusion.

- Since a premise is needed to connect the 4th and 5th claim, this is not a good argument.
- This argument was helpful because I learned how to better analyze complex arguments and think about which premises can connect to conclusions.

Plausible Claims

In Chapter 3, Epstein briefly talks about plausible claims, but it is not hard to learn what the purpose of a plausible claim actually is. When writing a plausible claim, it can be a recognized as a response to some type of literature, and they are seen very often in a court room. According to Epstein, "A claim is plausible if we have good reason to believe it is true" (38). If someone is not completely sold on a claim that, for example, you are trying to make, your claim is less plausible because that person does not have a very good reason to believe your claim is absolutely true. If there is no reason to believe a claim is true, that claim is considered skeptical and implausible. Even the Supreme Court now requires that a plaintiff must state a plausible claim for relief, which I noticed last semester when I had to sit through a case for a class project. The plaintiff said "I am suing Bob for stabbing my daughter with a knife because she has a hole in her chest." This claim was considered plausible because they had pictures of the girls' wound in the court room, and the girl said that the man who she recognized was the one that stabbed her.

Strong Vs. Valid Arguments

Distinguishing between a strong argument and a valid argument may seem complicated, but they are used all the time and apply to the concept of making a good argument. In a valid argument, it is not possible for the conclusion to be false if the evidence of the argument is actually true. For instance, Bob is a basketball player. All basketball players are tall. So Bob is tall. My example shows that this is a valid argument because there is no way that the premises are true and the conclusion could be false at the same time. Even though the conclusion is true, it makes for a valid but bad argument because there have been some short basketball players.
A strong argument has a true conclusion to go along with its true premises. An example of a strong argument is from the other day when I was at work at P.F. Chang's. The customer said, "Every time I eat shellfish lately I feel ill. It can't be any of the sauce you use, because the other day I had shellfish at home I got sick. I must have a shellfish allergy." This is a strong, and good argument because I knew the customer was not lying since I had to guide her to a shellfish-free meal. However, it is not valid because this lady may have had some virus which reacts with shellfish to make you feel worse.

Ch.3 Tests for an Argument to be Good

According to Epstein, there are three tests to look at before an argument can be considered to be good. First, the premises must be reasonable, or believable. It must be more logical than the conclusion, and finally, the argument has to be valid or strong. For example, the best college football teams in the nation are ranked numbers one through twenty-five. This weekend, Alabama was ranked number one and beat San Jose State. So, Alabama is the best college football team in the nation. In this argument, the premises are logical, and are more believable than the conclusion. It is true that the best college football teams are ranked by numbers one through twenty-five, and it is true that Alabama is number one. However, even though Alabama is ranked number one and should be considered the best team in the nation, someone else might believe number two ranked Ohio State should be considered the best team because they also won and are undefeated just like Alabama. This means that the premises are true, but the conclusion may be false. Overall, the argument is strong, but not valid. Since we know that college football teams are ranked and Alabama is currently number one, it makes a good argument.

Prescriptive and Descriptive Claims

Prescriptive and descriptive claims, from "Critical Thinking" by Epstein, are very simple concepts to understand and come about every day, whether you are at home, work, or at school. Descriptive claims state a fact, or are a true statement, and prescriptive claims are when someone suggests what ought to be. If you see the words "should" or "should not" in a sentence, that sentence is probably a prescriptive claim. An example of a descriptive claim is "Bryan is a student at San Jose State." This is descriptive because it is a statement about what already is, or a known fact. Anyone that knows me, or is in this class, already knows that I attend San Jose State. An example of a prescriptive claim is" Bryan should get his homework done prior to the deadline." This is prescriptive because I need to and should get my homework done before the Saturday night deadline. Whenever you hear about something that "should" be, now you know that it is a prescriptive claim.

Vague Sentence

Even though some sentences appear as claims, they may not be completely up to par and might qualify as vague sentences. When the speaker needs to make his or her sentence clearer because there are so many ways to understand it and you cannot settle on one way, they are expressing a vague sentence.

An example of a vague sentence for me reminds me of last year when I was at an event in San Francisco with my girlfriend and a group of friends. There were a ton of people at the event and at one point I split up with the group to get something to drink. While I'm gone, my girlfriend splits from the group and cannot find them. She calls me to meet up with her and says "I'm standing under the green flag, come meet me here." I look around and notice that there are about 20 of the same green flags spread around the complex. This is a vague sentence because I had to ask many questions in response in order to understand and settle on which flag she was standing by, and eventually I found her.

Subjective and Objective Claims

There are numerous types of subjective and objective claims. A claim that is subjective invokes personal standards and whether it is true or false depends on what an individual, or group of individuals, thinks, believes, or feels. In other words, when someone voices their opinion they are making a subjective claim. When watching "Sportscenter," there are many subjective claims throughout the show because there are so many different sports reporters with their own opinions. Yesterday when I was watching "Sportscenter" with my roommate, one reporter asserted that the "New Orleans Saints are going to repeat as Super Bowl Champions this year." This is a subjective claim because while the reporter believes the Saints will win, I stated that I think the Colts will win, and my roommate claimed that the Vikings will win the Super Bowl. The reporter's claim differs from other opinions, so it is a subjective claim.

A claim that is objective applies impersonal standards. An objective claim can be true or false, but has to be a statement about a factual matter. When I talked with someone today about when we should leave for a high school football game tomorrow, she asserted that "we have to leave earlier because it will take longer to get there in traffic." This can be proven to be true because traffic leads to a longer commute, so it is an example of an objective claim.