Most Interesting Concept

Like what I mentioned in my past blog, I have learned so much from this class. However, the one that stood out the most and I really enjoyed learning is about General Claims. I always notice people saying some or all, no or only, as well as vague generalities. Before this class I thought that mentioning those words was just fine when stating facts or doing a report in class, because it seems like everybody else says it. However, after this class I am very much more careful when it comes to using those words because it is misleading for people that you talk to. I remember one time when I told my friend and said “Some cars are harder to park in the SJSU parking lot.” By saying “some” I could have meant just a car or two or I could mean more than the half of the type of cars that park in the garage. By learning about being vague, I notice more how I use some words very lightly even if they can be misinterpreted by many.

Opinions About The Class...

I had an online class just a semester ago, and I had a tough time because our lectures were online, and watching it on the computer was the least motivating thing you can do for an online class. This class was surprisingly different from the one I took, and is so much more manageable without having the student lag on their classwork, because there is a due date for each discussion every week- which I like because it makes me have to do work to earn a good grade, and not push it off until the last minute. The exercises we used as well were very helpful and something that anyone can relate to so it is easier to comprehend and apply to our own situations.

The only thing that I least like about this class is how I did not really get to know the people in my group as well as those people that I see in class, but the group work that my group had was tremendously great. Through that I know that the group members are just as amazing as they are online. I also don’t really think this class need any much more improvement since it is a pretty good and enjoyable class- I love getting comments from my fellow students on my blog and the idea of a blogging class is also fun. I really enjoyed taking this under Professor Perez because she made it very much enjoyable :)

What I Have Learned From This Class...

This Critical Decision Making class has helped me in many ways, not only to support my arguments and claims but also how to communicate well with other people as well as through groups. I have learned so many ways to exercise critical thinking for school and also for communicating with others- particularly, analyzing claims such as prescriptive, objective and subjective claims, the difference between vague sentences and ambiguous sentences and how to identify if a statement is one of those.

I also learned a lot of different fallacies that people use in their statements to lure the person on leaning towards their side when it comes to arguments. Since I already encountered fallacies in my English 1B class, I like how this class supplemented more fallacies that I did not learn. Some that I learned from this class are: begging the question, shifting the burden of proof, strawman, relevance, slanters, and ridicule- which are the Violating the Principle of Rational Discussion. I specifically liked the appeal to emotion chapter, because I have noticed how appeal to pity usually gets me every time that I see the commercials about animal violence or children from Africa on the television. Appeal to fear is also something that candidates use to earn more votes, that I did not even realize they are using until the book we use in class mentioned it.

Chapter 15

Like any other claims and arguments, it is unavoidable to make mistakes when it comes to evaluating cause and effect. There are particularly two mistakes in evaluating cause and effect, according to Chapter 15 in Epstein.

I think the easiest way to explain how reversing cause and effect can be a mistake is by showing an example. Here it goes…

Duncan: Spending too much time on the computer is bad for you.

Martin: Why is that?

Duncan: Well, because most people tend to disregard personal communication or physical activities, and this can affect relationships in the long run.

Martin: Well, maybe people aren’t just going on the computer to go on Facebook or Twitter, but to actually do school work. You know how most school work now is all online.

Another problem that we encounter when evaluating cause and effect is when we look too hard for a cause. There are times when we don’t always have to be looking for the reason why things happened. Most of us have a tendency to think or even make up our own inferences why such things occur or as they call it in Epstein post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this, therefore because of this).

Thoughts on Mission: Critical Website

The most useful thing I found in the Mission: Critical website is the way they defined each topic thoroughly and gave very good examples that the reader could easily comprehend- some of the examples given can even relate to their readers, which makes it easier to understand and learn. The explanations were very straightforward and helpful especially when one needs to know how to properly argue and/or state claims.

The website also supplies multiple links to other topics on the website that supports a certain topic to explain it more and show how it connects to other aspects of the argument. Not only does the website give great explanations and examples, but it also offers exercises, which indicates reasons why you chose the wrong option, that can help the reader understand the topic better and test themselves as well. I think the website is a great supplement to what the book we have for class offers, since we get to see more examples and definitions.

Cause and Effect

The information from the Cause and Effect website was very helpful. The website diligently explained how cause and effect arguments can be similar and different in some ways that the arguments can make the statements stronger or weaker. According to the website, http://www.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/induc/causal.html, the three factors that affect a causal argument’s strength are:

1.       How acceptable or demonstrable the implied comparison is.  

2.       How likely the case for causation seems to be.

3.       How credible the “only significant difference” or “only significant commonality” claim is.

The example used was also very effective since it’s something that any of the reader can experience while driving, and it may be good to know how to argue well if ever one gets into a situation like that. The exercises provided in the website were also very helpful since it also tells you the reason why you get the answer wrong, if ever you do. It also shows you how well you know the subject.

Sign of Reasoning and Casual Reasoning

I found the picture on page 253 on Epstein really interesting, because it reminded me of the questions that they had for the tests I took before getting into college. At first I thought that they were just a simple methodology of reasoning, but it turns out the pictures actually have more elaborate meaning when it comes to analogy.

Anyway, that was only one of the things I found interesting in this week’s topic, but the one that really caught my attention was Sign of Reasoning, because even if we’re just having a casual conversation with friends or in class, we don’t really focus that we are pretty much almost always reasoning when we talk. Not only that, but we also use Casual Reasoning when trying to make sense of things by figuring out why such things happened. For example:

Amanda has been working as a volunteer at the children’s hospital, and she hasn’t been getting enough sleep. She probably caught the cold from one of the patients and lack of sleep making her more vulnerable to it.

Reasoning by Analogy

Reasoning by Analogy was the one that confused me the most; to be honest some of them seemed to have a close related description to each other that you can almost be mistaken with understanding them. Since I was having trouble understanding Reasoning by Analogy, I did some research online to help me out with the definition and also some examples from this site: http://www4.samford.edu/schools/netlaw/dh2/logic/analogy.htm

Turns out according to the site, that Reasoning by Analogy is one of the forms of inductive reasoning. It is “an analogy is a statement of a logical relationship between two similar things that are compared with each other. An argument by analogy is presented in the form of "A is like B," or "X is similar to Y." To understand the topic better, the site offers a very elaborate example of how it works by comparing fruits and how they fall into different categories but even so, can still make a great argument out of their differences.

Examples

1.       Reasoning by Analogy:

Premise 1: Kelly is a nursing major and goes to SJSU, needs to pass her WST to take upper GEs.

Premise 2: Ryan is an engineering major and goes to SJSU, needs to pass his WST to take upper GEs.

Premise 3: Brad is a business major and goes to SJSU, needs to pass his WST to take upper GEs.

Conclusion: Therefore if you attend SJSU, no matter what your major is, you have to take WST to take upper GEs.

2.       Sign of Reasoning:

Mom: Duncan, can you please clean your room?

Duncan: Not right now, mom. I’m too busy because of this research paper due tomorrow.

Mom: Well, find time to do it when you’re done.

Duncan: Will do!

3.       Casual Reasoning:

Amanda has been working as a volunteer at the children’s hospital, and she hasn’t been getting enough sleep. She probably caught the cold from one of the patients and lack of sleep making her more vulnerable to it.

4.       Reasoning by Criteria:

I guess Leah would want something useful if people are going to give her Christmas presents. Would this be useful to her?

5.       Reasoning by Example:

Collin: How did you improve your writing skills so quick?

Carrie: I just wrote a lot. Blogging helped me a lot to improve it and notice my mistakes I didn’t before.

6.       Inductive Reasoning:

I always grab breakfast at school with my sister every Tuesday ever since Fall 2010 semester started. Even if I don’t have school next Tuesday, my sister still expects me to grab breakfast with her since she’s gotten used to it. Therefore, Tuesdays is my sister and I’s usual hang out day.

7.       Deductive Reasoning:

Premise 1: Cats are felines.

Premise 2: Chocolate is a cat.

Conclusion: Chocolate is a feline.

Appealing to Fear

Appealing to fear, according to Epstein on page 192, “is a way for politicians and advertisers to manipulate people” for them to get their support or lure them to buy their products. A great example for this is the way politicians used advertisement just the past election for state governors. We’ve noticed that instead of mostly advertising themselves, most of the politicians used advertising as a way to put out the negative comments against their opponents.

Obviously, when we hear negative statements about candidate our initial reaction is to prevent from voting for that person. However, we’re not focusing on what could be true and the positives that they are offering if you vote for them. Instead, we are disappointed by the fear, that their opponents have brought upon us by highlighting the negative side of the candidate, that they wouldn’t do so well if we end up voting for them for office. Even if they are politicians and many of us depend on them to make the country better, we cannot be sure who is telling the truth or just simply ruining other people’s images.

6. Appeal of Spite

It may not be so obvious, but appeal to spite is very common during our everyday conversations- whether may it be with classmates and even most likely to happen between friends. According to Epstein, appeal to spite is a statement that is “the hope of revenge” and is considered immoral for other cultures because it’s somehow a way “to ‘get even,’ to preserve one’s ‘honor’.” For example:

Jeremy: It’s almost Jennifer’s birthday. Are you planning on throwing her a surprise party?

Jasmine: Yeah, actually I haven’t thought of that. That sounds like a great idea. She would love that.

John: Why would you even do that for her if she forgot your birthday last year, and didn’t even bother saying sorry to you when I reminded her? I wouldn’t even care if I were you.

It is usually not a good argument, for it does not really support why someone shouldn’t help the other with a reasonable response, instead they reason out based on the unfairness that the person experienced before.

Appeal to Emotion

Having done the second group assignment, where in we used PETA as our organization of choice, I’ve realized how many organizations use the appeal to emotion to win their viewers and supporters. According to Epstein, appeal to emotion is when the person feels entitled to do something because of how they felt. The most that affects me is usually the type of appeal that we see in appeal to pity. However, the appeal to pity can be quite misleading since we tend to focus on how we feel about the situation rather than focusing on the claims and premises that they are arguing for. For example:

I feel like I don’t want to eat for a week after seeing the commercial of kids needing our help in Ethiopia- especially how we’re so abundant in food here in the U.S. All we can do, really, is to send them money for donation.

                Unfortunately, for this situation, we do not know if the person stating this might need the money more for something else than sending their money for donation.

               

Needs More Discussion: Fallacies

I think the topic about Fallacies needs more discussion because there are different types presented all over the book, and it can get pretty confusing which one’s which when all of them are put together. However, some of them are pretty straightforward just by knowing the name such as the slippery slope, emotional appeal, slanters, ridicule, and the straw man. I had trouble specifically for the Structural Fallacies because even if the definition on the book was straightforward, I think I need to see an example explaining how it works since they only showed a chart using letters like A, B, S, or P to represent the fallacy.

The site I found shows and describes more fallacies than what Epstein had in the book. I actually encountered the fallacies given in the site during my English 1B class, so I was quite more familiar with those than the ones discussed in our current book.

http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html

Hopefully this would help! :)

The most useful thing I’ve learned from the assignments is group work, and not just any group work but actually working towards a goal just by communicating online. I’m proud to say that my group has accomplished in communicating even if we have no clue how the person we’re working with looks like. Besides group work, the most useful aspect of the assignment I’ve learned is using the arguing techniques to prove our points for our papers and even real-life arguments and claims.

My group is currently working on PETA, and I’m learning on how does emotional appeal affects people when it comes to those saddening advertisements they show on T.V., which makes you want to donate. Not only those, but by knowing how ads use emotional appeal to tempt viewers also helped me decide whether to believe if they’re telling the truth or not.

I think by taking this class and doing the assignments, I’ve developed a better understanding of how to properly support my arguments or stand towards something, by not falling into traps like fallacies or vagueness. This class has also been helpful with doing research papers, because usually those require a lot of citing and proving why your point should be taken into consideration.

All and Some + Precise and Vague Generalities

Usually when we see claims, especially for advertisements, we are often lured in by the words “all” and/or “some” since these words can be used to represent how many people use the product and/or how much the product works for those who use it. However, “all” and “some” can be easily confused with if not critically analyzed or if the given statement is not direct to the point or there’s some vagueness to it.

According to Epstein, “All means “Every single one, no exceptions.” However, it can also be interpreted as “Every single one, and there is at least one.” On the other hand, “Some means “At least one,” but can also be interpreted as “At least one, but not all.” For example:

All: All puppies are cute.

Some: Some puppies are not cute.

These generalizations can be avoided if there are Precise Generalities or the given statement shows more detail and explains it more elaborately like specifying a precise number, compared to just stating all or some, which are Vague Generalities.

Precise Generalities: Seven of my friends in the group are girls. (This is more direct).

Vague Generalities: Some of my friends in the group are girls. (“Some” can possibly be an infinite number depending on the person’s interpretation).

Compound Claims and “or” claims and Contradictory of a Claim

When it comes to compound and “or” claims, there are other claims involved but it has to be considered as a one claim depending on the truth-value of the claims that are in the statement.  Another part of the “or” claim is the alternative. To clarify this claim here is an example:

Jasmine either has to do her homework on Thursday night, or do it on Saturday during the party.

The example shows how the situation is an either, or situation wherein only one thing can be chosen.

Contradictory of a claim or a negation of a claim, according to Epstein on page 114, is the reverse of the truth-value.  For example:

Claim: Jasmine is going to do her homework on Thursday night.

Contradictory: Jasmine is not going to do her homework on Thursday night.

I think among the topics discussed in Chapter 6, the negation of a claim is my favorite because it is the easiest one to understand.

Raising Objections and Refuting an Argument

We can all agree that we don’t always approve on what everyone tells us. We have the right to agree or disagree, or raise objections on a statement that we think is false or dubious.  By raising objections it is also another way of implementing that the statement is a weak or bad argument. For example:

Jeremy: We need to get a bigger flat screen TV.

Jasmine: What’s the matter with the one we have now?

Jeremy: It’s outdated and can’t play Blu Ray disks.

Jasmine: It still works perfectly fine though, and we’re just going to waste money.

Jeremy: The one I saw was actually on sale that’s why I’ve been considering on getting it.

Jasmine:  What are we going to do with the old TV?

Jeremy: We can always donate it to Goodwill.

By proving to Jasmine that Jeremy can find a way to convince her to purchase a new TV, challenges his argument despite of Jasmine’s objections to his proposal.

According to Epstein on page 149, there are three ways to directly disprove or refute an argument and these are:

·         Showing that one of the premises is uncertain.

·         The argument is not valid or strong.

·         The conclusion is false.

For example:

It’s useless to ask for advice or questions if you’re not going to take the advice people will tell you. You might as well not ask if you’re just going to do so. There is no point asking for advice.

The example shows how we are not sure if the person who is asking for advice is willing to consider taking a bad advice that someone told him or her. We are not sure what kind of advice or question the person asked, and it is not completely true that there is no point asking for advice.

Conditional Claim and Contrapositive Condition

Conditional Claim uses the “If…then…” mechanism for the statement to “have the same truth-value (page 121). The antecedent says if something is like this, then the consequent is it would be like that. To clarify that, here is an example:

If Jeremy retains what he learned from his English 1A and 1B and studied for the WST, then he has a higher chance of passing the test.

The consequent’s conditions show the possible result/s through the antecedent.

Under Necessary and sufficient conditions category, Contrapositive condition is easier to comprehend if the statement has two claims that are equal to each other “if each is true exactly when the other is,” according to Epstein. The claim and its contrapositive should complement each other for the statement to work. For example:

Claim: If Jeremy can take the 100W class, than that means he passed the WST.

Contrapositive: If Jeremy did not pass the WST, then he cannot take the 100W class.

I think the Contrapositive condition has a pretty clear definition and mechanism that we can understand easily. However, it is only one of the many ways to clarify and support a claim.

Differences Between Implying and Inferring

Implying is when someone states something that could have a different interpretation or meaning, without directly meaning or saying it but giving slight hints. For example:

Friends who pick up their phones even in the middle of the night, just to comfort you are the ones you would want to keep.

The person seems to be implying that if someone is a good friend, they would pick up their phone when you need them even if it is during an inconvenient time.

Inferring is when the person is interpreting the statement differently from what was said, and adding “therefore so-and-so it is really like this…”, or taking a different meaning of the statement besides the literal one.  For example:

Jasmine must have thought that I’m not a good friend and did not care because I missed her call around 2 AM, because I was deeply asleep.

The person is making inferences or a guess what the first example meant, even if it is possible that the first example is just simply saying so and not trying to make anyone feel bad.

Online Advertising

http://livingsocial.com/deals/8086-photo-session-95?pid=13015596

The advertisement I found is about an opportunity to have an in-studio photo shoot with Blue Sky, which is supposedly a prestigious photo shoot company for known brands and magazines. The advertisement entitles customers about eighty-four percent discount than the usual price, and also guarantees a satisfactory experience and portraits. I believe the claims given in the website are acceptable since livingsocial.com is a website that many of my friends use and trust when it comes to getting exclusive discounts.  

However, it also depends on the product that the website is advertising. There might be claims that sound very appealing to customers, but there is a possibility that there are catches when it comes to things that are too good to be true. Even if Blue Sky sounds like a reputable photo studio, we do not know if they really produce good photos because for the famous brands mentioned in the ad. It is obvious that they would edit the pictures for extra cost to create more appealing posters for their companies. There is no certainty that the pictures taken for average customers would be as good as for those taken for the top notch brands mentioned. We cannot be so sure with internet ads until we actually check the fine prints and agreements that come with them.

Repairing Arguments

Star Wars is under the Science Fiction category.

Jasmine needs to buy a Science Fiction book.            

Based on the given example, the person stating the argument is being irrational because the first premise does not relate to the second sentence.  The first sentence stated is completely irrelevant to the second premise, which can help the argument to become stronger if it is removed. However, the example does not state the reason why Jasmine is getting a Science Fiction book.

The argument would be stronger if there would be a connection to the conclusion with the second sentence- perhaps something like, “It was one of the required books for her Literature class,” or if connected with the first sentence, “Jasmine can purchase a Star Wars analogy book because it is under Science Fiction.”  By adding on these premises, the argument would be more plausible and easier for the reader to comprehend what the person is trying to imply for bringing up Star Wars or why Jasmine needs to purchase a Science Fiction book.  

Negotiating Effectively: Practice Mentoring

On page 66 from The Essential Guide to Communication, by Dan O’Hair and Mary Wiemann the book discusses how mentoring works. A mentor is someone who has more experience and is able to be a role model for others who are less experienced, the protégé, by helping them out and setting a good example for them to excel too.

We can usually see mentors in the work field wherein they teach and help protégés develop their skills because they were the ones who have been there.  For the mentor-protégé relationship to work, the protégé should be willing to learn from and work with the mentor. On the other hand the mentor should be willing to “be approachable, confident, and secure,” for the protégé should be “ambitious, loyal, and open-minded,” so the relationship could work well and result in a positive note (O’Hair, 67).

The mentoring stages are:

1.       Initiation: this is when the mentor and protégé know more about each other, wherein the mentor gives advice to the protégé. As for the protégé, this is when he or she should be open-minded and ready to learn from the mentor.

2.       Cultivation: this is when the mentor and protégé create a deeper bond wherein the mentor “protects and promotes the protégé” (O’Hair, 67). Respect and familiarity is gained during this stage.

3.       Separation: this is when the mentor and protégé begins to drift apart, either because somebody moved to a different department or the protégé can handle him or herself on their own.

4.       Redefinition: this is the point wherein the relationship between the two is successful, and usually when the mentor and protégé see each other as equal. However, the mentor can still share advice with the protégé.

Fallacies: Straw Man

I was lucky enough to have already encountered this type of fallacy in my English 1B class, so I was able to use the book that we used in class for reference which was Writing Logically, Thinking Critically by Sheila Cooper and Rosemary Patton. According to the book, a Straw Man argument is when “a person creates and then attacks a distorted version of the opposition’s argument.”  For example:

The manager wants to put up new shelves for shoes, clothes, and accessories. She said she might  hire someone new to help in the store too. And she's going to decrease our salary to be able to do it.   

In a Straw Man fallacy the statement says something positive that will completely deceive the reader as if everything about it is great. However after describing the statement in a positive note, the statement would suddenly distort the argument by identifying something negative that would oppose what was first specified. By doing so, it discourages the reader to believe all the positive statements mentioned because of the negative comment, thus making the reader think negatively of the statement.

Structures of Arguments

Exercise #2:

1) I’m on my way to school. 2) I left five minutes late. 3) Traffic is heavy. 4) Therefore, I’ll be late for class. 5) So I might as well stop and get breakfast.

Argument: Yes

Conclusion: I’m late for class anyway, might as well stop and get breakfast.

Additional Premises Needed: I think to fully understand why the person decides to stop and get breakfast instead of heading straight to class; there should be a connecting premise between 4 and 5. Something like “Even if I’m only a minute late for class the teacher will still deduct 5 points anyway,” will help elaborate the argument. By adding another premise, the argument’s conclusion which is 5 would make more sense.  

Subargument: Sentences 1, 2, and 3 are the subarguments. The 4^th sentence is the result of the first three, while 5 is the conclusion.

Good Argument: The argument is good if the person would add on another premise between 4 and 5 to explain the conclusion. However, it was weak when only left with how it was given in the exercise. After adding the extra premise the argument became stronger and clearer to understand how it came about to the conclusion.

This exercise helped me break down the statement and fully understand what is missing to make the argument more credible. It also showed how one premise can change the strength of an argument. I am definitely going to use what I learned from this exercise to make stronger arguments in my research papers.

Types of Leadership

I found “Types of Leadership” resourceful and interesting as a student, because we do a lot of group work in class. I think group works will be easier to accomplish if people could get their hands on the topic about leadership types. Not only would the leader be happy but also the members. The results of the group work would also be much better.

Let’s admit it, there are times when some group members don’t cooperate as much as you want them to, or sometimes some members tend to take over and want to do things their way. When these things occur either way it can turn the group work into a nightmare.

The least I liked was the Authoritarian leadership; because it means the leader does all the decisions without any comments or suggestions from the group members. The only advantage that a group can get is by having things decided easily or swiftly. However, there are also disadvantages like group members are not as contented or dedicated to their work. The other one that I’m not a big of a fan of was Consultative Leadership. I think it was unfair how members put in their ideas but the leader is still the one that has the say to what the group will do. In comparison to Authoritarian leadership, the advantage of Consultative Leadership is “more reasoned and educated outcome” (O’Hair, 34). Laissez-faire Leadership is also part of my no-no list, because it completely lacks group communication.

The most I’m in favor of is Participative Leadership, because the group members and the leader work together to complete a task, wherein the leader just monitors the group but is equal to the other members as well. This style of leadership creates the most success with the group work as well as contented and dedicated group members.

I think it’s important for groups to know how to communicate with one another to achieve their goal and still keep a good working relationship.

Valid vs. Strong Argument

In order to say that an argument is valid, the premises should be true as well as the conclusion. It is not a valid argument if the premises are true but the conclusion is false. When stating a valid argument usually the arguments are based on facts or are plausible, which supports the statement and makes the argument stronger, in comparison to using how people perceive things or share their opinions. As an example of a valid argument:


In order to take the WST, students at SJSU have to pass the English 1A and English 1B courses.

Jasmine is a student at SJSU and passed the WST last semester.

Therefore Jasmine already took English 1A and 1B.

As students at SJSU, we know that before we can take the WST, we have to pass English 1A and English 1B. Because Jasmine is a student at SJSU and she passed the WST, we can strongly conclude that she took English 1A and 1B classes.

On the other hand, strong arguments can have true premises, but a false conclusion. However, even if the premises are true and it might seem like the argument is strong, there is still a possibility that the conclusion does not agree or support the premises. For example:

Jeremy passed English 1A and English 1B.

Jeremy is qualified to take the WST.

Jeremy will pass the WST.

The given example shows that Jeremy passed the English 1A and 1B, and is qualified to take the WST. The premises are true and are strong arguments. However, it does not mean that just because he took the required courses that he will pass the WST. We could only assume that he would pass the test, but there’s also a possibility that he will fail it. It may be because Jeremy could still be lacking some writing skills for the WST even if he passed the required classes.

Argument

Titanic is on the movie box office list for making over $1.8 billion worldwide. According to Yahoo! Movies’ five critics, the movie scored an A-. Titanic is the greatest movie of all time.

The example’s argument is strong because the premises given are true. However, even if the premises are true that the movie Titanic made more than a billion dollars since it opened in 1997, and Yahoo! Movies gave a rating of A-, it does not mean that Titanic is the greatest movie of all time, as stated in the conclusion. The first premise stating how much money the movie made is credible. According to my research, Yahoo! Movie’s A- rating was given by five critics. For the conclusion, it is true that Titanic may be one of the greatest movies of all time, but it does not hold the title as “The Greatest Movie of All Time.” It is also possible that Titanic was the greatest movie of all time, but another movie could have taken the title from it. The conclusion could also just be the person’s opinion stating the sentence; perhaps because it’s the person’s favorite movie or the only movie that person has ever watched.

Descriptive and Prescriptive Claims

Descriptive Claim simply states the explanation of the given subject. For example, when a student says, “The United States is recently experiencing an economic crisis; because of this, schools are the first ones that are very much affected by the budget cuts.” The example is just simply saying what is currently happening to the economic crisis in the United States, and how it is affecting the education system of the country, which makes it a Descriptive Claim, without saying what should be done like the Prescriptive Claim.


On the other hand, Prescriptive Claim suggests what someone should do, or what is appropriate to do to solve the problem for the good/better/best of the situation. For example, when a student says, “So that schools would not suffer under the budget cuts that are currently happening in the United States, the government should prioritize education and not choose to cut budget on that area the most.” The statement given exercises Value Judgment as well in comparison to a moral claim, showing what should be done to better the situation.

"It's cool"

I was walking to my Step Training class today when a couple of guys were talking in front of the indoor pool at the Spartan Complex. I didn’t mean to eavesdrop, but I couldn’t help but hear some of their conversation. One of the guys said, “It’s cool.” Immediately, it reminded me of the second discussion question we have for our class, so here I am using that as an example.


In my head I was wondering what he meant when he said “It’s cool,” because it could have been a totally different interpretation. He could have meant the weather was cool today or in a “That book is awesome” or “It’s alright or okay” type of cool. “It” could have been a different “it” from what I perceived from what I heard, like what I mentioned, the weather, or something that he cooked or baked and waiting for to cool down if applied to a different situation.

I just realized from this assignment how most of us use such vague or ambiguous language. The funny thing is we don’t even notice it until we really analyze it closer and really pay attention to it. I guess this happens because we assume that the people we talk to already know what we’re talking about, but to others it could have been a different interpretation.

Discussion Week 1: Subjective and Objective Claims

Subjective and Objective Claims are just one of the methods that we use to judge the point of view of the topic of conversation or an argument that we are trying to prove.


Based on how I understand Subjective Claim, it is usually a personal opinion that a person bases his or her judgments on. For example, I’m a big fan of La Victoria Taqueria’s drink Horchata, so one time my mom saw me drinking it when I came home from school. She asked me what it was, so I told her and mentioned how it’s really good and refreshing, so I asked if she wants a sip to taste it. She took a big sip out of the cup and said, “OHHH, I don’t like it.” I saw the weird disgusted look on her face, and can’t believe that she didn’t like it because my friends and I love Horchata. My mom’s opinion on the drink, Horchata, was a subjective claim because she stated her opinion about a drink that some love, but some are also unfamiliar with.

On the other hand, Objective Claim is stating a fact or something that is true and is completely not based on personal opinions or standards. As an example, one of my guy friends asked me what kind of car I drive, and I said a Toyota Highlander. This is an Objective Claim, because my answer didn’t need my opinion and it is a fact that I do drive a Toyota Highlander.

All in all, Subjective Claim is based on personal opinion or preferences, while Objective Claim is based on fact.

Introductory Post

Hello, my name is Jill Andrea Sendaydiego. I’m 19 years old, and currently on my 3rd year in SJSU on pursuing a major in Nursing. During my freshman year in SJSU Spring semester, I took a Comm 20 class and learned useful public speaking skills from my professor, Hugh Haiker. During my spare time I like to hang out with my friends, listen to music, or write blogs on my Tumblr. I was fortunate enough to be one of the students who made it into the Dean's List last semester. I'm hoping that I would keep getting good grades for the rest of my college years. I’m really looking forward to enhancing my communication skills in Critical Thinking this semester with the help of this class :)