Violating the Principle of Rational Discussion

I chose begging the question, “The point of an argument is to convince that a claim is true.  So the premises of an argument have to be more plausible than the conclusion” (pg 202).  This is a fallacy in which a premise in an argument contains a direct or indirect assumption that the conclusion is true.  This often makes the argument circular because the person is assuming what they are trying to prove is true.  An example that I found was, “Executions are moral because we must have a death penalty to discourage violent crime.”  This assumption came up in my moral ethics class last year.  The arguer was assuming that the death penalty is a deterrent of crime.  This may be true, but it is just as questionable as the idea that the death penalty is moral.  This argument was extremely debatable in my class and created a circular argument because of the many different opinions on what is morally right and wrong.

Complex Argument Analysis pg. 225

I chose #2.

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

Argument: Yes, I believe this is an argument.  She is mainly arguing with herself about the situation and what to do about it.  By being late the person has left themselves with more choices, such as getting breakfast.

Conclusion: The conclusion is that since the person is already late they might as well get some breakfast to eat.

Additional premises needed?  Yes, I believe there are more premises that are necessary to make this a better argument.  The person was very vague and did not mention any reasons as to why they left five minutes late.  Maybe those five minutes would have been the difference between traffic and no traffic?  But no further explanation was given.

Identify any sub-argument:  The person thought that since they are already going to be late, being even later would not be a problem.

Good Argument?  I do not believe that this is a good argument.  More explanation was needed because the argument was very vague and did not give a detailed reasoning.  If this argument were to be given to a teacher I do not think that the teacher would be very understanding because the argument is not very valid.

I think that this exercise was useful.  It helped me to pick out the different parts of an argument and to understand what makes a good argument.

Definitions

In the reading I found the definitions section very useful and helpful. It is often very frustrating when people misunderstand each other in their conversations. In Chapter 2, we read that we can replace vague or ambiguous sentences to make them clearer. Another way is to use a definition to help explain a specific word or phrase so that the other person does not misinterpret what we are trying to say. A definition does not always mean what it says in the dictionary. We can make our own definitions to help further explain. For example, we can use a synonym for a word as the definition or we can just further describe the word.


An example of a synonym:

If you were to use the word evading in a conversation and the other person did not know what that meant you could tell them it means the same as escaping.

An example of a description:

The word misinterpret could be described as: something that is not understood or maybe understood in the wrong way.

Subjective/Objective Claims

Epstein explains a subjective claim as a claim that whether it is true or false depends on what someone thinks, believes, or feels. This type of claim has to do with more of an opinion base. Someone may feel that there claim is true, but when they ask someone else what they think they may feel the opposite. An example of a subjective claim:


My family is the best that anyone could ask for.

I always make this claim to other people because my family and I are really close. This claim is subjective because although I think that my family is the best, it is my opinion. Someone else may disagree with me or feel that there family is the best. The word “best” is a key word in this sentence which is often used when people are describing their feelings or opinions.

An objective claim, on the other hand, is a claim that is not subjective. Whether it is true or false does not depend on what anyone thinks or believes. This type of claim is based more on a true or false basis and can be verified as either true or false. An example of an objective claim:

I drive an eclipse spyder convertible.

I have used this claim many times already this semester in classes. The professor usually has the students talk to other students and get to know them and this is one of the questions that I ask or am asked. This is a true objective claim that is not based on feeing or belief. This claim is objective because it can either be verified as true or false.

Vague Sentence

After reading Chapter 2 in Epstein, I was amazed at how many people, including myself, consistently use vague sentences. In many conversations I have found myself confused as to what the other person meant in their statements, since it was too vague to determine the true meaning. A vague sentence that really sticks in my mind was when I was at work the other day. I work in a restaurant as a waitress. One of my co-workers had a table walk out on them without paying their bill. She explained to me what they looked like, “They were a group of 4 white teenagers.” Since, a “walkout” means that the waiter or waitress pays the bill, she really wanted to find the group. I then went outside to look for them, but soon realized that her description was too vague to find them. Outside of the restaurant in the parking lot there was a car show going on. There was no possible way to find them.