What I learned....

Throughout the semester I learned a variety of things in our Comm 41 course.  The most important item used in our class was of course our textbook, Critical Thinking.  The textbook we used in class went over many different topics and thoroughly explained each one with examples.  Our smaller book which was based off group communication was extremely helpful.   I learned how to communicate more effectively with fellow group members after reading our group communication book.   It gave me more confidence to speak openly about our group and what we would do to create and efficient paper.  A lot of concepts in the course helped me actually be able to think critically and be able to recognize claims, arguments, and statements.  Our readings helped me determine the difference between a strong or valid argument.  It helped that our textbook provided a lot of examples for each new concept I learned about.   The examples were always different from each other that way we can grasp at the idea and be able to determine what the difference is between each concept.

My favorite thing in class

My favorite part of our Comm 41 class was the fact that it was online and we had to have a blog.  I liked how we had to post on our blogs about concepts we learned in class.  My least favorite thing in class was having a time limit on when we can post on our blogs.   I didn’t like the twelve hour limit between posts because I would tend to forget to do my posts.   Perhaps if the time limit were cut shorter to maybe six hours it would be easier to remember.  Also, the group work was pretty cool to do since it helped that we all did not have to do individual essays, but some people did not make any effort on helping with the group work.  I think if team assessment was mandatory when we turned in our papers it would help identify which members actually did the work and which ones did not.

Chapter 14: Interesting Concept

In chapter fourteen it was based on generalizing.  The one thing I found interesting in the chapter that was also helpful was the “three premises needed for a good generalization”.   In order for an argument to be a generalization it needs to have three premises.  The first one listed is “the sample is representative”.  The sample needs to be representative if “no one subgroup of the whole population is represented more than its proportion in the population.”  Secondly, “the sample is big enough”, you need to measure how much more likely your generalization is going to be “accurate as you increase the number in your sample”. Lastly, “the sample is studied well” we need to ask questions that are not bias, in order for it to be investigated well.  All three premises are needed in order for it to be considered a good generalization.  Without the three premises your generalization will be considered bias.

Mission Critical

The Mission Critical website was extremely helpful and useful.  It provided a lot of information on inductive and deductive reasoning, casual arguments, conditional arguments, and a lot more.  It was set up as a table of contents and it broke down the readings and exercises by subject.  It begins with the parts of an argument, to basic relations, analysis, fallacies, and other common fallacies.  All the information provided is similar to what we have read in our Critical Thinking textbook.   It also has all the emotional appeals, which also helped me, understand the emotions better.  They had appeal to fear, pity, spite, prejudice, vanity, and loyalty.  What is helpful on this website is all the exercises and reviews that were provided.  I liked how they provided free exercises to help understand the concepts better, and when you pick your answer and it get it right or wrong, the website takes you to the answer and explains why that was the answer.  So, when I would get an answer wrong I was able to comprehend why it wasn’t the answer I picked.

Inductive Reasoning

The one reasoning that was difficult to understand first was inductive reasoning.   When I first read about it was a difficult subject to grasp.  It took me several times to read it over again, and I was able to comprehend it just a bit more.  Inductive reasoning is when you propose a proposition based off previous observations that were made.  What helped me understand the concept was the example that was given.   The example was made by David Hume:

 Premise: The sun has risen east every morning up until now.

  Conclusion: The sun will also rise in the east tomorrow.

After reading the example I was able to understand inductive reasoning a lot more.  It actually clarified it for me and I was able to comprehend what inductive reasoning was.  I also learned that inductive and deductive reasoning contrast with each other.  Inductive reasoning conclusions contain more information than the premise does.

Chapter 12: Interesting Concept

An interesting concept that I found in chapter twelve is section C: Judging Analogies.  The section breaks it down to the reader on how to determine the differences in an analogy and to see if there is a reason that might not apply to the general principle.  In the section it presented different examples to help determine the analysis of the presented example.  The section also has a box that gives seven questions on evaluation an analogy.  The first question when evaluating an analogy; is this an argument? What is the conclusion?, second question: what is the comparison?, third: what are the premises?, fourth: what are the similarities?, fifth: can we state the similarities as premises?, sixth: does the general principle really apply to both sides?, and finally: is the argument strong or valid?  These are just some of the questions that are listed and more can be found in our textbook on page 257.

Appeal to Fear

The advertisement I chose was the above the influence campaign for the appeal to fear.   The advertisement has two mice sitting on a bed taking rat poison, which is their drug to get high off of.  It represents humans taking drugs that are harmful to their body, examples are people who inhale glue, people who misuse prescription medications, etc.   On the bottom of the advertisement it says in small print, “What’s the worst that could happen?”  The advertisement is trying to influence fear on people who are considering or using drugs.  I believe that the advertisement uses a good argument, since they used mice and rat poison to represent what drugs are too mice.  Drugs in a way are like rat poison, but its “human poison” to our bodies.  Also it shows the two mice hanging out in their room with the box of poison on the floor and one of the mice is offering the other one some rat poison to get high off of.  The question “What’s the worst that could happen?” also helps influence fear because the worst that can happen is death when using drugs.