Discussion Question #3- Week 16

3) Pick one concept from throughout the semester that you feel can use further discussion.


One concept that I feel could be elaborated on more in the semester is compound claims- the whole chapter. There was a lot of information in that chapter whether it be about the contradictory of a claim or conditional claims or contrapositive or denying the antecedent or slippery slope argument or reasoning from hypothesis. All of chapter 6 was very important and good information to know. 
I feel that a lot of the concepts in this chapter are easy to understand however they can be confusing because some definitions are very similar. Also, the reasoning in a chain and slippery slope section is very interesting to me and I would have liked to do more exercises on it or something like that. 
The part that was most confusing for me that could use further discussion is the section of valid and weak forms of arguments using conditionals. This part has 4 different ways of evaluations whether the argument is valid or weak by using conditionals. 

Discussion Question #2- Week 16

2) What was your favorite thing about the class?  What was your least favorite thing about the class?  How can this class be improved?  Again, be specific.


My favorite thing about this class was the postings that we were to do in discussion week. The questions we were to answer for each chapter or about the class were very open ended questions and i feel it gave me a chance to show what i have learned either within that chapter or overall. I enjoyed being able to answer the open ended questions without there being a right or wrong answer. 
My least favorite thing about this class was the 12 hour time slot within posts. I know that part of taking an online class is to utilize your time and organize your time during the week and of course make time to do the work that needs to be done. However, going to school and working during the day, it is very hard to make sure i am able to fulfill that 12 hour time slot. Sometimes i would have to set an alarm for the middle of the night just so id be able to fulfill my posting for that week within the time we are given. We all have busy weeks and i feel the 12 hour time slot makes it a lot harder to make sure that we fulfill our posts and points for the week. 
This class can be improved by not making a time slot as how far  apart posts need to be posted, making the weeks from sunday to sunday, and making the final be online as well. 

Discussion Question #1- Week 16

1) What have you learned in this class over the course of the semester?  Be specific. 


After taking this Comm. class, i have learned a lot over the semester. In addition to taking Comm. 41 i also took Comm. 40 this semester and a lot of the concepts that I was learning, i happened to be learning in both classes to a certain extent- So it was like doubling learning for me. 
Specifically in this class i enjoyed learning about what specifically a claim is and the in depth details of a claim and how a claim can be used. I also enjoyed learning about what exactly an argument is and how an argument can be strong/weak, and valid. Everyone knows how to argue its just in our nature to be able to argue and defend ourselves, however there are specific details in an argument that we might not know about; and this class gave me that insight on the in depth detail about arguments. 
Overall, i thought this class gave me an overall good insight on what is right and wrong in arguing and how to argue correctly. Aslo, how to evaluate an argument with specific details and concepts that we have learned throughout the semester. 
I enjoyed this class, although it was an online class which made it a little hard to really interact with fellow students and made it a bit harder to meet with our group and sometimes made it hard to fully understand that material without the professor lecturing or explaining face to face; this class was overall easy to understand. 

Discussion Question #3- Week 13

3). Pick one concept from the assigned reading (chapter 15), that we have not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.

The normal conditions- for a causal claim, the normal conditions are the obvious and plausible unstated claims that are needed to establish that the relationship between purported cause and purported effect is valid or strong. In an argument, we need additional premises other known as normal conditions to show that the inference is valid or strong.

I found it interesting that for there to be cause and effect, there is no possible way for the cause to be true and the effect to be false- which as explained is the same with premises and conclusion of an argument. Therefore, when using additional premises in an argument, these premises will establish a correlation of generalization of determining the cause and effect. 

Another thing I found interesting is that because the normal conditions cannot be specified for a general causal claim, statistical arguments are used to establish that there is some link between the cause an effect. There are three different concepts that are used for these arguments that I found very interesting to read into.

Discussion Question #2- Week 13

2). What was useful about the Mission Critical webiste?

When I first opened this page, it was very overwhelming because there were so many links to click on for reasoning and explanations for each and every point made.

However, after clicking on the different sections and descriptions of each point made, it was very useful and helpful to understand in depth rather than just an example.

I found it very helpful that in every section of explanation there were multiple examples that gave a clear and precise underlined definition of each concept. Also, I really enjoyed reading about the different parts of an argument, analysis of an argument and the different fallacies- There was so much different information within these topics that I didn’t know about or it was different than what I had read about them before.

In comparison to the Cause and Effect website, that was merely just for understanding and exercises. The Mission Critical website, I would say was easier to understand and there were more explanations of each point.  

Discussion Question #1- Week 13

1). What was useful about the Cause and Effect website reading and exercises?

While reading the Cause Effect Website provided for this question, it was easy to understand and easy to paint a picture in my head about the situation that was explained as an example of a causal argument. As it was stated in this explanation, one of the most important uses for inductive reasoning is to argue causation. This is very true- in all cases, especially in situation where fingers can be pointed to different people.

It was very useful to read this introduction to Causal Arguments to get a clear explanation of what and how exactly cause and effect occur in different situation while arguing causation. It was helpful to somewhat see the arguments mapped out and to be informed in what comes next.

The exercises from this website were very helpful because it gave me a better understanding of how causal arguments and arguing causation can be used in different contexts. 

Discussion Question #3- Week 12

3). Pick one concept or idea from the assigned reading, that we have not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting, and discuss it.

Judging an analogy was very interesting to me. After reading about the different examples of how to evaluate analogies, it was clear to me that there were different ways to conclude whether the argument is strong/weak. When evaluating an analogy there are specific things to pay attention to: whether the statement is an argument, what is the conclusion, what is the comparison, what are the premises, what are the similarities, is there a general principle that covers both sides, does the general principle apply to both sides, and is the argument strong or valid?

After all, an analogy is the comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification. Therefore, reasoning by analogy is the comparison on one side where we draw the conclusion, so on the other side we conclude the same thing. When judging analogies it is important to realize that its not a valid argument when one side is like the other side, there needs to be reasoning. 

Discussion Question #2- Week 12

2). Sometimes when something is difficult to understand, it becomes a bit clearer when we try to explain it to someone else.  Which type of reasoning was most difficult to understand?  Please do some additional internet research on that specific type of reasoning and discuss what you learned.

http://www.experiment-resources.com/causal-reasoning.html

Causal Reasoning was more difficult for me to understand because the definition through the website we were given was hard to understand. After researching and finding my own information on causal reasoning which was a lot easier for me to understand, the idea is that any cause leads to an effect.

The website that helped me understand causal reasoning is attached. They used the scientific process to explain causal reasoning; which helped me understand how it could be explained step by step. For example: starting with a hypothesis then scientists will predict, then observe and test predictions, then comes induction. Through this process, by eliminating the predictions that will not work for this hypothesis, it can be determined what causes the effect other wise known as the hypothesis.