Skip to main content

Blog Post 1 Chapter 3

In this chapter the author talks about how people make sense of argumentation. He discusses five ways that help people in making sense of an argument and make you a more effective advocate.
The five ways that help make sense of an argument are good reasons, good story, science, feminist theory and alternative dispute resolution.
First, the author defines good reasons as the way, claims are justified through reasoned discourse. It is used to support claims by employing standard patterns of inference, drawn from logic. You also appear reasonable if your arguments are consistent and don't contradict each other.
Second, the author defines good story as a means to understand social interactions. When someone describes an event, we try to decide if it makes sense on the basis of how coherent and believable the story is.
Third, the author defines science as a systematic observation of the world through the senses of slight, sound, touch, and smell which are assumed to make sense. Science has become predominant over the twentieth century, it still has persuasive power but has failed to present the truth that most people hope for.
Fourth the author defines feminist theory as a systematic way of examining the social differences between men and women. It encourages us to carefully differentiate between argumentation and verbal aggression.
And lastly, the author defines (alternative dispute resolution or ADR) as a way to make sense of argumentation in a world of fragmented identities and relationships that characterize the twenty-first century. It helps negotiate tensions within society without erasing important differences.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Chap 5

Chapter five focuses primarily on identifying and developing propositions for problems that people think are relevant. It goes over 6 steps for choosing a valid proposition based on a perceived “feeling of doubt.” While all six steps may not be necessary, the collectively ensure a well thought out and firm proposition. The six steps include identifying the question, surveying implicated objectives (or understanding what is the goal accomplishment in regard to the question), searching for new information, considering alternative options, considering costs and risks of each potential proposition, and then finally choosing one of the propositions. The authors then go on to talk about analyzing and strengthening the proposition chosen. This includes identification and ranking of the issues that the proposition addresses as well as understanding how the decision makers will react to these issues and propositions. In general, with all these methods of critically analyzing the proposition, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Chapter 10

There were a couple of terms I found in this chapter that I wish were explained a little more. First, the concept of uncritical responses to refutation is only covered briefly. I think that this is one of the most fundamental barriers to effective public argumentation in the United States right now. I find this issue most concerning for the liberal party. Recalling the last election and the concept of 'incremental' argumentation, I feel that people demonstrated a massive failure of critical thinking by voting for third parties or not voting. People who were disappointed with Hillary Clinton's candidacy in place of Bernie Sanders decided to either continue voting for Bernie or not vote altogether. Neither of these strategies amounted to effective support of their cause, and they constitute the uncritical "knee-jerk" reaction described in this chapter. In this case, uncritical response to opposition worked directly against the interests of the decision-makers. A...
1 comment
Read more

Chaper 8

Chapter 8 of Argumentation and Critical Decision Making continues down the route of talking about support for argumentation. This chapter specifically focuses on values as support for arguments, how to recognize them and the best ways to attack them. Values are defined as “ concepts of what is desirable that arguers use and decision makers understand” (121).  There are several types of values mentioned such as stated, implied, positive, negative, terminal, instrumental, abstract and concrete values.  Stated values are state directly what concepts they hold. For example, words such as “freedom” or “health” are stated values because they mean exactly what they're trying to portray. Not all values are as explicit. Some are more vague and called implied values. One of the examples that the book uses to show the contrast between the two is in the case of work equality. When talking about the subject saying, “ Equal pay for equal work” would be a stated value and “ Women deserve th...
Post a Comment
Read more