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.

Compound Claims

A concept that I found interesting in regards to Chapter 6 deals with compound claims. Compound claims are used many times throughout the day. A compound claim is a major claim with another claim in and of itself. For example, I will go to the store and buy a red shirt or a blue shirt. The major claim is that I will go to the store to buy a shirt. The compound claim is that the shirt will either be red or blue.

As mentioned before, Compound Claims are used several times throughout the day. My most recent encounter with a compound claim occurred this morning when my mom asked what would I eat for breakfast. I replied, " I will cook either pancakes and bacon or french toast and bacon for breakfast". My major claim was that I would cook breakfast. The compound part of the claim is that I would either be cooking pancakes and bacon or french toast and bacon.

False Advertisement

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1vl5-6Axi4

The link above is to a Proactive commercial featuring celebrity skateboarder Ryan Sheckler a.k.a the star of MTV's "Life of Ryan". The main claim of this commercial is that Proactive will give users "clear , touchable skin". I would absolutely have to agree with this claim because I know many people that have used proactive including my younger and older brothers. From what I witnessed with their use of proactive was the total opposite of what is advertised. My brother who sought to remove his acne, ended up with an even worst skin rash. My younger brother just got blotchy skin.

I would think that since Ryan Sheckler promotes the product it would be somewhat accurate as to what it does. Also I think the commercial alone loses credibility at the beginning where it does not even begin to talk about the product until closer to the end. They put too much emphasis on the life of Ryan Sheckler creating an appeal to popularity or common belief. People would believe that just because Ryan Sheckler uses proactive and it "works" for him, that it would also work for themselves.

But I am here to tell you BEWARE of Proactive.

A Bit More About Fallacies

A fallacy is the result of a faulty premise. The premise is faulty because of the reasoning for the argument is bad. Chapter 11 of the Epstein text discusses some different types of fallacies. I will discuss the "Bad Appeal to Common Belief" because I find that a lot of people fall victim to this type of fallacy because it is so greatly used in almost everything.

The Bad Appeal to Common Belief is based on the assertion that if everyone believes a claim to be true then it must be true. This type of fallacy is used all the time especially in advertisement or throughout an ordinary day. Those that are guilty of using this fallacy tend to use a vast population as support to their claim. For example: "everyone" or "most people" or "everybody who is anybody" are common indicators of this fallacy. Those that use this type of fallacy rely on the majority to determine the truth of their claim.

A recent example of Bad Appeal to Common Belief:

-Little Brother: Mom, can you get me a hotel room for after prom for me and my date and a couple of our friends

-Mom: NO!!! Absolutely not!

-Little Brother: Why not? Everyone else's parents are getting them rooms

My brother assumed that by letting my mom know that everyone else's parents were getting them rooms, that my mom would change her mind. Needless to say, it did not. LOL.

A better example would probably be...

It is okay to drink alcohol in moderation when you go out on the weekends because most people do, and they aren't all alcoholics.

3 Types Of Fallacies

According to the text, a fallacy is a bad argument that is typically unable to be fixed. There are three types of fallacies discussed in the text: structural fallacies, content fallacies, and violations of the Principles of Rational Discussion.

A Structural Fallacy is an argument by which its form determines it to be a bad argument.

Content Fallacies are arguments where the claims/premises require fixing.

Principles of Rational Discussion: the assumption that the person that we are talking/writing to:

1. Knows about what is being discussed

2. Is willing and/or able to reason well

3. Is not lying

I found most interesting the violations of the Principles of Rational Discussion because I find myself guilty of this fallacy. I am known for beginning a discussion without considering first who I am talking to or their knowledge of what I am planning to present to them. I find myself usually talking above people's heads. Reading about this type of fallacy will make me consider these principle when speaking/presenting to others.

Valid vs Strong Arguments

Valid Argument:

A valid argument is an argument that is in correct form, but not necessarily true. Whenever the premises are true that conclusion must be true. In a valid argument, truth is determined by whether the premises are true. If the premises are false then the conclusion cannot be true. For example:

If 2+3=5 then 3+2=5

In this example, this is a valid argument because both premises are true, thus making the conclusion true.

Strong Argument:

A strong argument is an argument with good evidence to support the claim. Strong arguments are invalid arguments that have true premises. For example:

Most girls drive Volkswagen Beetles.

I am a girl.

I drive a Volkswagen Beetle.

Although my conclusion is invalid, my argument is strong.

I do not actually understand strong arguments so if anyone has a better example or definition for me, I would me more than appreciative if you would help me out.

Thanks

Its All A Matter of Fact Versus Opinion

When talking about Subjective and Objective claims it is easiest to think about the difference in terms of opinion versus fact. A Subjective Claim is based on whether something is true or false to a specific person based on his or her own personal beliefs, feelings, and/or values. For example, earlier this week my friend told me that taking this class online will be hard. While there may be some truth to her claim, it is only definitely true for her because of her perception of what is "hard". We might have different study habits and work ethics (which we do ;-D) which makes taking this class online doable for me. On the other hand an Objective Claim is the exact opposite. An objective claim gains its truth-value from the actual fact of the matter. It does not consider personal feelings when determining whether it is true or not. For example, I drive a 2002 Volkswagen Beetle. This claim can be proven true by looking in my driveway to discover a 2002 Volkswagen Beetle :) .

A Little About Myself

Hi Everyone!

My name is Khalilah and I am going into my 3rd year at SJSU. I am a Kinesiology major with and emphasis in Sports Management. I am from Long Beach, Ca (So. Cal girl ;)) and I like San Jose very much. As you could probably tell from my display name, I am a really big fan of Jamba Juice. I absolutely love it!!! My only experience with Comm Studies is Comm 20. I learned a lot in Comm 20. Before I took Comm 20, I was a very nervous and shy person and that class taught me how to organize my thoughts in a way that I would not have to be nervous. What I got out of that class is that public speaking is almost a formula and all I would have to do is plug in my information to produce a successful speech. From this class I hope to learn a way to think more critically so that I can better express my ideas and other information. This is my 1st online class, so I am new to this whole thing. I am really looking forward to a great summer term and working with the rest of you all.