bad appeal to authority.

"Bad appeal to authority" seems like a fancy term for peer pressure. When you hear the phrase, “Come on, everyone is doing it,” it's a common "bad appeal to authority" case. We tend to believe in our friends because we can trust them. Although this really shouldn’t be the case because they may know what they’re talking about, but they could just be acting. People should keep in mind that unless there’s other evidence to show that what they are saying is true, you shouldn’t believe in it.

Actors and actresses on our favorite television shows and movies are perfect examples of this. We tend to believe in what they are doing is truly them because they are so confident in it. In reality, they’re just acting out a character. Most of the time, the character they are portraying is far from what they are in real life. It happens to me all the time. Whenever I watch GLEE, I always think that the actor playing Artie (a character who’s wheelchair bound) can’t walk. But after seeing dozens of interviews and seeing him in real life perform, I know he can walk. There’s no further proof to believe that he can’t walk, other than a tv show character. He's really convincing though...

advertisements.

The advertisement that I chose is for TOMs eyewear. It’s a fairly new product from the company, and like its shoes, if you buy a pair, it will provide a pair of glasses to people in need.

From personal experience, I can trust this ad because it’s a company that I’m familiar with. Also, they have been around for a few years. Although I don’t really know if they do really give back. I can only find so many pictures of the company actually giving a pair of shoes or a pair of glasses to needy people.

From this ad alone, it’s really difficult to judge whether or not this is a reliable ad. It features two Caucasian people wearing the kind of glasses this company sells, but it doesn’t really show that they are the type of people to give back. They look like they’re fairly wealthy from what they are wearing. It is a bit misleading because, if I’m not mistaken, it’s suppose to represent everyday people being able to wear and purchase this product. Yet, the clothes that they are wearing in this ad are far from everyday wear. I don’t know anyone that dresses this fancy.

Overall, the ad is very subtle, using little text. I guess this company is going by the saying, "A picture's worth a thousand words."

argument repair.

"AJ writes scripts for television shows. So AJ must be good at writing."

You can already tell by just reading this argument that it’s weak. You can try adding an additional premise stating, “He graduated with a degree in Media” to repair the argument, but that wouldn’t really make any difference. He may have graduated from it, but that doesn’t really “glue” the premise to the conclusion. Also, you can’t really believe in the conclusion. It’s pretty dubious. Is he good at casual writing? How about formal writing? There are a lot of different possibilities for this particular statement. Not only that, but the premise is also very ambiguous. How do we know if the television show he’s writing for is actually doing well, screenplay-wise?

Although, you can make this a valid argument by adding, “Currently, he writes for the television show Modern Family.” This way, the premise and the conclusion are glued, which can make the argument good.

Overall, I think this is a pretty weak argument.

Technologic....technologic.

The “Master Communication Technology” section of “The Essential Guide to Group Communication” struck my attention this week. Technology has been one of the key components to a successful organization, especially now. Take our cell phones, for example. Only a few years ago, we couldn’t even get Internet on our phones, and if we did it was ridiculously slow (and the graphics were terrible!). Now, it seems that every cell phone has the capability to connect to the Internet wherever you go. You can basically work through your cell phone if your organization allows it.

Although with technology moving faster than ever, it does have its hindrances for people when it comes to communication. We’ve gone from pagers to the internet within a short amount of time. However, one must learn how to “maximize and enhance communication skills” when it comes to all this technology. In other words, use it to the best of your ability.

It’s crazy to see how far technology has come when it comes to communication. A simple “hello” to someone far away used to take so long, but now with the internet a simple message like that takes seconds. It’s no wonder that organizations like to use networking sites like Twitter and Facebook to connect to its employees. Since they know almost everyone uses them for leisure, having a page for their organization allows them to get messages out quicker than a mass email. These organizations have indeed “maximized and enhanced communication skills” with the usage of the Internet.

As for me, majority of the people I know already know that I use technology for almost every interaction. Since I know the Internet is readily available for me wherever I go, I use it to communicate. I’m in front of a computer and have my phone on most of my day anyway, so why would I not use the Internet on both devices? Basically if it’s ready to use, I’ll use it, especially when it comes to communication.

Appeal to Emotion Fallacy.

It is said in the Epstein textbook that a lot of arguments are considered bad because “they use or require for repair a false or dubious (doubtful) premise (assumption).”

The "appeal to emotion" fallacy uses psychology to make you believe something is true. We see this all the time, especially in television. They say things like, “Buy this product! It’ll make you feel amazing!!” Almost every single commercial is using an “appeal to emotion” fallacy. Television shows use this as well.

In one episode of the Nickelodeon television series, Victorious, the character Trina tells her sister’s friends that she got her feet smoothened by “pukka fish” from Puerto Iguazu, all with no bad consequences, and you get your feet feeling as “smooth as a baby’s butt.” Of course, who wouldn’t want their thick skin on their foot to be smooth, right?

Her sister’s friends tried it, and they seemed to be fine. They got their feet smoothened and gloated over it amongst their classmates. Unfortunately at the end of the episode, they find out that they are highly poisonous and the friends (including Trina) who got their feet smoothened by the fish caught a disease that attacked their central nervous system.

Not only that, but Trina admitted, “I bought illegal pukka fish from a guy in a van!” Meaning, she knew that it would have some side effects, but she didn’t say anything to anyone about it.

As funny as it was, it doesn’t deny the fact that Trina used an “appeal to emotion” fallacy. She appealed to her sister’s friends’ emotions in getting their feet feeling smoother than the average person, but she did not even bother telling them any other additional information that did not make them feel good. As long as she got them to do it as well, it seemed like that was all she cared about. (How mean!)

You have to give some love to Nickelodeon shows sometimes. They are educating you in so many ways. Sometimes you’re not even aware they’re educating you…

Structures of Arguments.

Las Vegas has too many people. (1)

-There’s not enough water in the desert to support more than a million people. (2)

-and the infrastructure of the city can’t handle more than a million (3)

-the streets are overcrowded (4)

-traffic is always congested (5)

-the schools are overcrowded, and new ones can’t be built fast enough (6)

we should stop migration to the city by tough zoning laws in the city and county. (7)

Argument? (Y/N)

Yes, it’s a valid argument.

Conclusion?

We should stop migration to the city by tough zoning laws in the city and county.

Additional premises needed?

I think if the argument were written in an “If/then” style, it would have been a bit more effective. At least, to my understanding it looks like a better way to put it.

“Las Vegas has too many people. IF there’s not enough water, as well as a stable infrastructure to support more than a million people, and traffic is always congested, THEN we should stop migration to the city by tough zoning laws in the city and county.”

Identify any subargument?

Lines 2-6 are independent and support the conclusion. And the conclusion supports Line 1.

Good argument?

Sure, it’s a good and through argument to give. The original argument is a bit verbose, but I understand it all.

Las Vegas is crowded and it’s small. Cigarette smoke can be smelled everywhere you go, a lot of people from far and wide go around from casino to casino here. Above all it’s located in the desert. With its hot and humid weather year round, of course you would worry about Las Vegas having a lot of people because supplies could be drained out a lot quicker.

I thought that this exercise was somewhat useful. It's definitely a very through way of analyzing an argument. The textbook is really confusing to understand for this section though. The examples they provided didn't really help me out so much. Like, in the argument about Justice Warren's opinion, the explanation at the bottom about the person's answers just felt like it was rewriting everything over again. In other words, I felt that the book could have put more clarification into this section. Well, I needed more clarification.

Feel free to clarify more for me on how to analyze an argument like this.

Effective Leaders.

What I found interesting in Ch. 3 of The Essential Guide to Group Communication was the small section titled, “Effective Leadership.” The book says that an effective leader must be able to inspire and motivate members to attain their goal, which requires them to be verbal, as well as open through communication. There are 3 factors for effective leadership:

Brings about desirable outcomes

Enhances credibility with the group

Inspires/motivates group members to participate

This made me think of the leaders that I’ve had in the past. Did they really do a good job in leading a group?

Recently, I joined a choir group with a few of my friends from church. We were working on a performance for a few days, but we didn’t really have an established leader that would tell us what to do and what we should work on. Luckily, one person stepped in and started leading us.

This person told us that we should put on a performance that the audience would never forget, so we needed to work a lot harder in what we were doing.

This person was also a credible leader because they worked on performances like these in the past, so they knew what they were talking about.

Lastly, this person always motivated us to keep going in our work with the performance. Even if our rehearsals lasted late into the night, they continued to be extremely energetic, which bounced onto all of us who were sleepy and getting tired of the song we were rehearsing. I can definitely say that this person was an effective leader. When we performed that song, the audience was extremely pleased with what we did. Hopefully this person continues to be the leader of this group.

Have a good weekend, everyone!!! :D Go out and hug a puppy.

Strong/Valid.

An argument is strong when its conclusion is false, even though its premises are true. This classification of an argument is apart of a scale of invalid arguments, which ranges from strong to weak.

Example of a strong argument:

When I hang around my little cousins at parties, it seems that all of them watch the show iCarly.

All these kids range from ages 6-12, so obviously they watch networks like Nickelodeon, which plays iCarly.

So majority of the adult minds would believe that only kids that are these ages would watch iCarly.

This conclusion is definitely false, and makes the argument invalid. It is definitely likely that kids watch iCarly, and that the ages of the kids are 6-12. Although I know a lot of people who are my age (even older!) who watches and enjoys iCarly, and one of those people happens to be myself.

However, an argument is considered valid when there is no way the premises are true and the conclusion false.

Example of a valid argument:

I remember one assignment that I had to do for one class, but it was graded pass/fail.

I did the assignment and passed.

In conclusion, I didn’t fail.

There is a possibility that I could have either passed the assignment or failed it. Thankfully, I passed the assignment. The conclusion of this is true because I could have either went one way or the other.

Argument.

I'll have to admit, this was a really hard section to understand. So basically, there are 3 tests to see if an argument can be considered good.

1. The premise (assumption) is plausible (reasonable).
2. The premise has to be more plausible than the conclusion.
3. The argument is valid/strong.

All these tests are independent, so one can pass, while the others may fail. It also doesn't matter which test you start with.

Example of an argument:
Acoustic musicians, who are not signed with a major record label, stay true and passionate to their music that they play.
Musicians signed with a major record label lose that passion and conform to what the label wants.
Therefore, Youtube musicians are better musicians.

The first statement about acoustic musicians is plausible, and definitely more plausible than the conclusion. There are no limits when it comes to music, especially when it comes to acoustic music. When you watch someone perform acoustically, with just them and an instrument of their choice, you can definitely see their passion being poured out through the music that they play.

The argument is plausible as well, but it’s definitely weak. We wouldn’t know about what musicians who are signed to major record labels go through, unless you are one. There could be a lot of possibilities as to why they are the way they are under that label.

Although the conclusion can be valid, it is a bit weak.

There are a lot of different types of musicians on Youtube, ranging from acoustic, like Gabe Bondoc, to rap, like D-Pryde. Even though they’re on Youtube, it doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re signed to a major record label. They could be signed to a label, and they stay true and passionate to their music. (Although there are those musicians who we all like to call, “sell outs.”) In other words, this is a little too ambiguous.

Overall this is valid, but it’s a weak argument.

Apprehension.

What I found interesting in chapter 2 of the Essential Guide to Group Communication was the section titled, “Effects of Communication in Groups.” It lists a few findings of what can happen if there is apprehension in a group.

The writers were also able to back up this information with findings that communication researchers McCroskey and Richmond made when studying apprehension. They found that people with high apprehension are seen in negative ways, such as “being more nervous,” “being less task oriented and less socially attractive,” and “making less valuable contributions…” This section also stated, when compared to less apprehensive people, high apprehensive people are “less likely to have high grades in college, to be offered interviews…”

I’m generally “the quiet person“ whenever I’m in a group, but so far I haven’t experienced some of what was described, particularly having low grades. Even though I’m quiet, my grades haven’t suffered for it. And I will admit that I’m not the most sociable person amongst people, but they don’t treat me any differently than anyone else.

Actually, I find it a lot easier to work alone than in a group because it’s easier to get things done, rather than waiting for other people to finish before moving on to doing something else. Whenever I’m in a group, I would do all the work that is required, but I’ll admit that I rarely share what I do come up with. If I do, then it’s just a glimpse of what I did, rather than sharing in its entirety. That’s how it’s been for me for the past few years I’ve been at SJSU.

Although when it comes to being less able to lead, I can completely relate. I never really lead a group before, unless I’m asked to. There are those rare times when I do lead without being asked, but that would only happen if the group that I’m working with has done nothing to work with.

Since this is a communication class, I’m definitely going to work on my communication skills when working with groups.

Sorry this was such a long entry. This is what happens when you don’t talk that much. I make up for it in writing. haha :3