Content Fallacies: I Didn't Quite Understand That..

One of the concepts that I did not quite understand when we first covered it is Content Fallacies. After doing the evaluation of a Social Organization paper I was better able to understand what exactly a content fallacy actually is. Here is my attempt to explain:

There are 2 types of fallacies, Structural (formal) and Content (informal). In Structural Fallacies, the fallacy occurs because of the structure of the premises. With content fallacies, there is something wrong with the content of what is being assert.

My hang up on understanding content fallacies was actually trying to find a list of content fallacies. A content fallacy is an actual type of fallacy. Lol :).

Reflection of My Summer

This summer I learned throughout this class to be organized. At first I started off very organized and I was up to date with everything. I went on vacation and things became unorganized and I ended up forgetting about a whole weeks worth of discussions. If I would've remained organized I would not have forgotten to do the weekly discussions.

My favorite thing about the class is that it is online and that I could pretty much do everything at my own pace. I was basically only responsible for meeting deadlines. I liked that the teacher was very accessible and was there to answer ALL of my questions (which is hard to find in an online class). What I didn't like about the class is the fact that the discussion questions had to be posted no sooner than 12 hours apart. This kinda threw me off over these last couple of weeks because I would have rather done all of them at once and when I would think about it again the discussion week would be over. My fault, should've been more organized :).

My only suggestion to improve this class would probably be to change the policy on the discussion questions. We should be allowed to post at will as long as we get the 3 questions answered within the week. I also think that we should be able to chose what to discuss like we do the 3 and then we have optional discussions as well.

This Summer I Learned....

Over the course of the summer I learned a lot about thinking critically. What I found most interesting over all the concepts that we have covered this summer is the ways in which people manipulate numbers to have ambiguous meanings. For example the use of general terms like "some" or using percentages as proof for something that has not been proven.

EX:

Some of the workers at Jamba Juice know how to make all of the smoothies.

This example is too vague because it does not show how many of the workers know how to make all of the smoothies. This could mean that only a couple of the workers know how to make all the smoothies or almost all of them know how. This claim is too general and should be made more specific.

To better this example you could say that:

80% of the workers at Jamba Juice know how to make all of the smoothies.

However, this claim is also very general. Someone who is not thinking critically would probably fall into this trap just because of the use of numbers; but someone who is thinking critically would evaluate the claim as being ambiguous. This statement could mean that 80% of all Jamba Juice workers or 80% of the workers at a particular store. This is a matter of 10 vs 1000. 80% of 10 and 80% of 1000 is a big difference.

The Truth About Numbers

Numbers in an argument are very ambiguous. They can be used in 2 ways. 1) to mislead or 2) to help. Who would've thought numbers can be used to deceive someone?

An example of misleading numbers would be:

More people are beginning to love Jamba Juice. Over the summer there sales have increased by 30%.

Although it may appear that there is nothing wrong about this statement--there is . This statement does not make clear how long the sales increase has been going on, has it progressively gone up or was 30% just a big jump in sales. What caused this 30% increase? Do they have a sale or a special (buy 1 get one free, etc). In other words the meaning of 30% has caused a complication.

An example of helpful numbers would be:

Many people drink Jamba Juice. Recent surveys show that over 80% of students has drank at least 1 smoothie in the past month. These numbers are helpful because this generic example kinda provides a source (recent surveys, should be more specific) and it show over a specific amount of time how many students have actually gone to Jamba Juice.

Watch out for statistics they could be out to deceive you. Always make sure the numbers are actually answering what the claim is actually trying to prove!

Appeal to Fear

On page 195 Exercise #3 is to find an advertisement that uses an appeal to fear. The advertisement that I have found is of a campaign started by mothers against drunk driving. In many of their commercials they use an appeal to fear because this is a very affective way to draw the attention of many people.

In this particular commercial the car accident would be enough to scare drivers into not driving under the influence but also other appeals to fear like the reference to Ken being in jail or Barbie being ugly with only one eye would also help to deter younger kids from drinking and driving because those consequences are probably not options they would want to experience. Barbie also uses an appeal to vanity with her statement about how she looks after her accident. This can be helpful in appealing to younger girls because throughout adolescence a females looks are a big deal.

Appeal to Emotion

Many people use appeals to emotion in order to provoke a certain action or reaction. These types of appeals are used very often and most frequently in advertisements or campaigns. For example in regards to the debate on abortion, those that are pro-life argue that abortion is murder. By saying that abortion is murder, those that are pro-life are compelled to think about abortion in this manner as well. By just thinking about the fact that abortion could be murder, many people might actually change their position on the issue.

A more general example would be:

If you drink Jamba Juice everyday, you will be healthy; but only those who want to be healthy will drink it.

This example is an appeal to emotion in that it is actually appealing to a person's health. Any normal person would want to be healthy so by reading this claim, they might actually begin to drink Jamba Juice more often in order to preserve their health.

Thats Too Vague-General Claims

Everyday people use vague statements that could either be considered true or false depending on how you interpret it; these types of statements, according to Chapter 8 in the Epstein text, are considered to be general claims. General claim statements make use of the terms "all", "some", "every".

Ex: Some of the smoothies at Jamba Juice are good.

This statement is a general claim because now the reader must think and try to figure out the following: Which of the drinks are good? How many of the drinks are good? and etc.

It is important to be able to recognize general claims so that you can think about what you are judging before you actually accept claim as true or false. Because people would assume the statement as true just because of the use of the terms "all", or "some", but a critical thinker would interpret the claim in ambiguous ways to determine is truth value.