Tracing the Cause Backwards

                One concept from Chapter 15 that I found interesting was tracing the cause backwards.  Tracing the cause backwards involves recalling the cause of each occurrence in sequence.  It is easiest to trace the cause back at the first step or the initial cause of one effect.  It is easiest to trace only to the first step because tracing back each cause can take forever and the further back you retrace, the harder it is to fill in the normal conditions.  I thought it was silly idea to continue going backwards to find the very beginning cause of an effect because a person could say, “Sue was born, and that caused the protest to occur”.  Going that far back makes it too complicated to fill in the normal conditions.  It is easier to simply go back to the first step and say, “Sue felt passionately about the campaign, and that caused the protest to occur”.

Mission Critical Website

I found the Mission Critical Website to be organized and also very useful for reviewing different kinds of arguments, fallacies, and even  emotional appeals.  The different links had very detailed explanations of what the different concepts were and were easy to comprehend, especially since we learned about most of these already.  There were also exercises in most links that allowed us to test our knowledge and if we happened to get an answer incorrect, it would explain why it was incorrect.  I thought this was really helpful because an explanation isn’t always given to you when you get an answer wrong, which then leaves you in confusion.  This website was useful for strengthening our knowledge on these topics and also served as good review in case we happened to have forgotten about a few concepts.  This website was very helpful to me and I plan to use it for future reference.

Causal Arguments

The Causal Argument website was very useful in helping me to really understand the concept of causal arguments. I learned that one of the most important uses for inductive reasoning is to argue causation.  A causal argument is basically made when something occurs because of something else, like a cause and effect.   The premise and claim of a causal argument have no significant difference, however each causal argument will be different for each party involved.   The website explained that there were three key factors that determine the strength of a causal argument and they are:

1.        How acceptable or demonstrable the implied comparison is

2.       How likely the case of causation seems to be

3.       How credible the “significant difference” or “only significant commonality” claim is

This website was very helpful in improving my understanding of causal arguments.  Now I feel much more able to identify and analyze causal arguments. 

Analogies in the Law

         In Chapter Twelve, Epstein discusses how Reasoning by Analogy is used in the law.  Reasoning by analogy is used in the law because the law is often very vague and unpredictable situations constantly arise.  Reasoning by analogy allows for detailed and meticulously analyzed arguments in the law.  The most common pattern of reasoning by analogy in law is reasoning by example.  It is a three step process and the steps are: Find similarity between cases, then announce the rule of law in the first case, and then make the rule of law applicable to the second case. An excerpt from Edward H Levi’s An Introduction to Legal Reasoning, discusses how cases set precedence for other cases.  Setting a precedent with any law makes the law become more specific based on the ruling of the judge.  It is important for the judge to look for differences between a case and others so that he or she is able to alter the general principle and make it applicable to the new decision.

Reasoning by Criteria

The type of reasoning that was most difficult for me to understand was reasoning by criteria.  Most of the types of reasoning discussed in my last post were familiar to me, however reasoning by criteria was not.  Reasoning by criteria was the most difficult for me to understand because I have never really heard of such this type of reasoning before.  Reasoning by criteria is when you establish criteria by which an outcome will be concluded, and then proceed to use the criteria to identify the best conclusion.  Sometimes it can be hard to determine which criteria to select.  Using values that are popular or common as criteria can be helpful because these criteria will be more easily accepted. 

 An example of reasoning by criteria is: “Many studies show that smoking causes lung cancer.  How about you don’t smoke?”

The criterion is that smoking causes lung cancer.   This criterion is used to establish the best outcome which would be not smoking. 

Reasoning Examples

Reasoning by Analogy is a form of inductive reasoning.  An analogy displays the logical relationship between two separate and similar things.  The analogy concludes the argument because if the first premise has a guaranteed conclusion, the second also must.

Ex:  Sally had braces, now she has straight teeth. Polly has braces.  Polly will have straight teeth.

Sign Reasoning is when two or more things are so tightly related that the existence or nonexistence of one indicates existence or nonexistence of the other.

Ex.  Where there is a bathroom, there is a toilet.

Casual Reasoning is the reasoning that describes the relationship between a cause and the effects.

Ex.  Sarah ate a burger, now she is full. 

The cause is that Sarah ate a burger, which led to the effect of her being full.

Reasoning by Criteria is when you identify the criteria of an outcome of a decision, and then identify the best decision with the criteria.

Ex.  I want to smell good. How about looking at some perfumes?

Reasoning by Example is the use of examples in an argument.

Ex: You should use sun block at the beach.  I didn’t last week, and got severe sunburn. 

Inductive Reasoning is inferring on something unobserved based on previous observation.

Ex:  I ate this bread yesterday and got a stomach ache.  If I eat the same bread today, I will get a stomach ache again.

Deductive Reasoning is reasoning that an argument is valid because the argument’s conclusion must be true when the premises are also true.

Ex: All humans have legs.  Jane is a human.  Jane has legs.

W11: Appeal to Pity

           

            A concept from Chapter 10 that I found very interesting was an appeal to pity.  An appeal to pity is when a person tries to gain support for their argument by making a person feel a sense of guilt or sadness.  I think an appeal to pity is used because people know that guilt is a big motivator for people to take action.  When pity or guilt is evoked from someone, they usually try to get rid of that sense of guilt by trying to help the cause. 

        

          An example of an appeal to pity would be the people that stand around the student union and ask people passing by “Which is cuter… a baby sea lion or a baby panda?”  They ask you this question and once you answer which is cuter, they show you a picture of that animal being mistreated.  They use the appeal to pity to get people to fight against this kind of animal cruelty.  They show the disturbing photos to evoke that sense of pity and guilt, and it definitely works.

W11: Appeal to Fear

            For exercise number three, I had to find an advertisement that appealed to a person’s emotion of fear.  I found this advertisement online that showed the consequences of drinking and driving. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwu7L38glcQ&feature=related

            This ad definitely appealed to people’s emotions of fear.  I think that a good majority of people are afraid of death because it is so unexpected and unavoidable.  This ad shows how making the simple decision to drive, can lead to traumatic consequences.  I think that this ad is effective and is a good argument because it emphasizes people’s fear of death.  To me, this advertisement definitely made a statement.  It showed how one simple decision, could dramatically affect the lives of innocent people who have so much to live for.   This advertisement appealed to fear by showing what can happen from making such a decision and it also really gets people to think twice about getting behind the wheel after drinking. 

W11: Appeal to Emotion

                Appeal to emotion is an argument that is used to cater to or manipulate a person’s emotions.  A person’s emotions are very important to consider when presenting an argument.  It is possible to appeal to fear, consequences, flattery, pity, vanity, ridicule, spite, or ignorance.  An appeal to emotion that strikes me is the appeal to flattery.   This strikes me because flattery is a very manipulative way to get what you want.

               An example of an appeal to flattery would be if a student was sent to the principal’s office for bad behavior.  The student should be punished, however the student sweet talks and flatters the principal by saying things like, “Surely a man as intelligent, generous, and kind as you can find it in your big heart to let this go.”  The principal is so overwhelmed with compliments and praise and the principal decides to let the student off the hook.  This is an appeal to flattery because the student used flattery to hide their own faults and to get the principal to support their argument.