Further Research

There was a part in Chapter 5 section D that was called “confusing possibility with plausibility” and I didn’t really understand it. The book didn’t give an example of what they each are so I still am confused on the difference. So, I looked up the definitions for us and will try and make an example of each. I found each of these definitions in the Merriam Webster dictionary:
Possible- being within the limits of ability, capacity, or realization
Plausible-
a.) superficially fair, reasonable, or valuable but often specious
b.) appearing worthy of belief
It's possible that you are correct = I don't know if you are correct, but you might be.
It's plausible that you are correct = It's reasonable to think that you are correct, so you probably are.
Basically, plausibility is what we use when we are critically thinking and reasoning; and possibility is just a way of measuring something without looking into it as much.

Group Projects

I really liked both of the projects. We learned how to work in groups and how to apply what we’ve learned rather than just knowing about it. It was also nice to be able to actually meet people in the class because it is online. But I really liked the second project. It allowed us to take what we’ve learned about claims and critical thinking and actually use it. My group chose PETA and we worked as a team to go through their website and pick it apart in terms of “locating, retrieving, organizing, analyzing, synthesizing and communicating. My specific task was to go through and find all the concealed claims. This was cool because I didn’t know what they were before so not only did I learn about them, but I also got to look for them on a professional website. I have enjoyed both projects and look forward to the third.

chapter 8

This chapter really goes into detail about how important word choice is in making valid arguments. In section A, the book goes into depth about words like ‘some’ and ‘all’. Basically, people are too vague with their choice of words. The thing I learned most from this section was how to properly form claims and their contradictions. This can be found on page 162 of the book. An example from everyday life would be as follows:
CLAIM
All dogs can swim.
CONTRADICTORY
Not every dog can swim.
Section B also discusses how important word choice is, but in terms of within the argument. This is shown real well on page 164 in variable form but I will give an example as well:
VALID
All dogs can swim.
KeyKey is a dog.
So KeyKey swims.
WEAK
All dogs can swim.
KeyKey can swim.
So KeyKey is a dog.
See, we only changed one part, but it is so important in determining the strength of the argument.

Chapter 6 Section B: Part 3-Valid and weak forms of arguments using conditionals

I will be discussing valid forms of arguments using conditionals. Remember, a conditional claim is “one that can be rewritten as an ‘if…..then….’ claim that must have the same truth-value.” There are two forms of arguments that are valid using conditionals. These are direct and indirect. A direct example of a valid reasoning with conditionals can be described as “If A, then B. It is A. So then it is B.” For example:
If you punch Jacob, he’s going to punch you back.
You punched Jacob.
So He punched you back.
This is valid because it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false.
An indirect example is the exact opposite. “If A, then B. It is not A. So it is not B.” For example:
If you punch Jacob, he’s going to punch you back.
You didn’t punch Jacob.
So He didn’t punch you.
These are the two ways to form an argument using conditionals. Hope that helps a little bit!

Chapter 7

2). Please discuss, in detail, what you learned from reading Chapter 7. Discuss at least 2 things you learned.
Chapter 2 discusses objections and different ways to refute an argument. I learned quite a bit this chapter though. The first thing I learned is how to answer every objection. Every time someone brings up a good point(objection), it is your job as the one making the argument to counter or answer it. For example:
Sean: We need to get more alcohol.
McGavin: We already have some.
Sean: Yeah, but there are girls coming over and they will drink some.
McGavin: So?
Sean: We will run out once they drink ours, so we should get more.
See, here Sean is raising objections which forces McGavin to answer them.
Another thing I learned about is using ridicule. The only problem with ridicule is that it doesn’t do anything to benefit the argument but rather just ends it. For example:
Sean: I hate girls. They all are all backstabbing b*tches.
McGavin: Why cuz you’re ex girl cheated on you? That doesn’t make them all backstabbing.
Sean: Yes it does. They are all the same.
McGavin: Yea, you should probably just turn gay then.
Here, McGavin doesn’t feel like arguing with Sean so he simply ends the argument by using ridicule.

Chapter 6

I learned a lot about how claims can be combined and have counter claims or negations. For instance, compound claims are “one composed of other claims, but which has to be viewed as just one claim.” In my own zesty tell ‘em words, that means it is made up of two different statements within one claim. For example, if I said, “Andy skateboarded to Taco Bell or some other fast food place.” These are two different claims because one claim says Andy skated to Taco Bell. The other claim says Andy skated to some other fast food place.
There are also contradictions to claims which are defined in the text as “a claim that has the opposite truth-value in all possible circumstances.” This is pretty basic but an example would be “Andy has red hair” and the contradiction (or negation) would be “Andy does not have red hair.”
These are two of the topics discussed in the chapter but there are a couple others as well. Hope these examples helped a little bit. Later.

Chapter 5 Section B: Personal Experiences

I chose to talk about the criteria for accepting or rejecting claims. I will try to give my opinion as well as possible although I am still slightly confused and just got back from the homecoming tailgate. Go Spartans! Anyway, the best way to find information that is reliable is to trust ourselves and our own personal experiences that we have already encountered in life. As the book says, "our most reliable source of information about the world is our own experience." It is important to trust yourself because that is honestly the only person you can trust. On the other hand, the book uses a good example of when NOT to trust your own experience when talking about eyewitness. It is true because when something happens real quick like a criminal punching you in the face, it is going to be really difficult to get a good enough look to be sure that you can trust what you saw. Nonetheless, our own experiences are usually the best way to judge if we can accept a claim or not. The book sums this up the best:
-We accept a claim if we know it is true from our own experience.
-We reject a claim if we know it is false from our own experience.
EXCEPTIONS:
-We have good reason to doubt our memory or our perception.
-The claim contradicts other experiences of ours, and there is a good argument against the claim