Skip to main content

Post 2 - Chapter 3


This chapter discusses different techniques that can be used when making arguments to encourage other people to adhere to the ideas.  These techniques used to grant adherence are good reasons, good stories, science, feminist theory, and alternative dispute resolution.  The previous chapter talked about how to form and analyze an argument, and this chapter focuses on the strength of an argument and how to get different people to take your side.  One similarity I see is being aware of your situation.  For example, if I am talking to someone who is very fact-based or dedicated to research, I may use more science and hard numbers or facts to back up my argument.  However, if I was trying to convince a feminist, I may focus on how my argument would impact women or what it would mean for feminist agendas.  Of course, nobody is one-sided, so many arguments would likely include a mix of all of the different techniques.  While these techniques are valuable to the person making the argument, I also think it makes critical thinking more important for the person hearing the argument.  We need to be sure that we aren’t just hearing a good story and ignoring the facts.  Or, if we hear just facts, we need to be sure that there are good reasons for us to do something with those facts. 

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