Chapter 14 generalizations

In the discussion of generalizing this week I found that it connects directly to everyday life.  Generalizing is the connection of our knowledge of the world with the argument at hand.   “To generalize is to make an argument.”  (Epstein, 280)  Because we expect generalizations we have to assume that they all are not correct.  Every time we generalize we must admit that there is always an exception or a chance that the generalization will be true.  To compare generalizing to an argument we need to see how its premises will be the most likely outcome (the generalization).     I realized that the most direct and important way to make sure a premise of a generalization is true is by looking at it.  Maybe you might need to do some research to make sure it was true, but based on our own experiences we gain a great tool to determine if the premises are true or not.

What I loved

My favorite thing about this class was a combination of outside resources that were available and the main text.  I really liked the websites that gave strong examples about everything we discuss in this class.  It almost could serve as a secondary to the main text by Epstein.  This book was one of the best parts of class as it served all main ideas and concepts to us in easy to understand language.  Every week we would read deeper into the text providing us with new ideas that we would relate to our lives.  My favorite part of this book was the way it was written and the language Epstein uses.  My least favorite part of this class was the many intricate parts to concepts and ideas that we had to learn.  I had trouble taking in the many different ways to look at such things as the many fallacy types.     

What I learned

 There is so much that I have learned from this semester at San Jose State.  After changing my major to Public Relations I realized I should learn how to communicate better.  I figured that working in a public relations firm would require good group communication skills.  I joined this class hoping to learn these skills and apply them to my future education.  This class taught me many different ideas and topics about arguments, group communication and the English language itself.  I realized that in daily talk I used many of the topics that this book addresses.  I found myself using vague sentences or fallacies in my arguments before taking this class.  However, I really enjoyed the main book from this semester Critical Thinking by Richard L. Epstein.  His way of writing was very enjoyable for different reasons.  For instance, he would explain topics in words that I could understand.  He sometimes wrote informally, but defiantly made perfect sense when explaining his ideas. 

Chapter 15

Chapter 15 contained a lot of information pertaining to cause and effect.  There are different types of causes, as explained by the text.  Particular causes which have one action leading to an effect such as lighting a fuse leads to a firework exploding.  Another type of cause is generalizations, and this pertains to our own experiences in life.  With common knowledge comes a generalizations such as knowing that because it is morning, the sun will be rising in the east.  Another type of cause is general cause which pertains to the fact that claims need to be true in order for the conclusion to be true.  In this case, normal conditions are all the very obvious unstated claims in one’s cause and effect.  The general cause and effect follows general knowledge as well; for example, knowing that holding a firework while lighting its fuse is a bad idea.  Causes always lead to effects.  

The San Jose Mission Critical website is a very helpful tool with great information.  It covers almost every topic we have discussed in class and is as helpful as Epstein’s text.  The two are great to read together and if I find that I do not understand one author I can refer to another about the same subject for clarification.  It’s great to have this tool which provides very clear and easily understandable information in a vast quantity.  Epstein’s text is the backbone of this class, and now I have this website if I ever need a second explanation on any subject covered in the text.  The tests are extremely helpful as well and quiz you on the exact information we are learning in this class.  Overall this website is a perfect reference for all information discussed in this class and in Epstein’s text.  I will be referring to this website about any topic I need help in. 

Cause Effect

The cause and effect website explained a new type of reasoning to me that I’m still a little unclear about.  To argue causation is a way to argue over many different topics that are found in today’s world.  For example the court systems are often the locations where causal arguing is used to win cases.  Now as I said before I am still a little unclear about this topic, so if I happen to post incorrect information, please leave me a comment and help me out.  For every action in this world there is a reaction.  Like the example the website gave, how since there was a truck parked in the bike lane, the bicyclist had to swerve around it.  Let’s look at an example I came up with:  Two boys are wrestling and one boy (Boy B) accidentally breaks his arm.  Let’s say this happened because Boy A picked him up and slammed him to the ground.  Boy B put his arm out to stop his fall, but ended up breaking it.  Now, is the cause of Boy B’s broken arm cause of wrestling, or is it because Boy A picked him up and slammed him?  In my mind I do not know for sure, but I am going to guess it was the fact that they were wrestling in the first place.  This brings up the part of the website that explains normality.  Because wrestling is dangerous, couldn’t this normally happen?  Or was Boy A wreck less and normally wouldn’t slam Boy B to the ground?  

Chapter 12

When analyzing reasoning by analogy there are a couple different parts of the argument that we have to look at.  According to the text, reasoning by analogy starts with a comparison that is part of the argument.  We judge this comparison to the strength and value of the rest of the argument when using this type of reasoning.  Both sides of the comparison are tested in this argument and should come to the same conclusion.  Analogies can be viewed in the same terms as premises, the conclusion of the argument relies on the value of the premises / analogies.  If we do not believe the premises or analogies to be true or valid, then we can disregard them in the argument.  If one side of the analogy is not valid, then we have nothing to judge the other side to.  Therefore it is necessary that both sides of analogies are clear, true, and similar.  To be similar is very important for analogies because it keeps the argument clear.  Understanding how the law uses analogies is very important as many are used in law making today.  New laws are created or judged by analogies of past laws.