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.