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.