COMM 3615: Argumentation (FA18)

Values are one of the most important parts of an argument and argumentation. Values shape what we believe in and can help us gain adherence or give adherence to certain claims. A value is “a conception… of the desirable that influences the selection from available modes, means and ends of action.” (121) It is important to keep in mind that everyone has different sets of values, some values will speak more to some people than others; which is why the desirability of a value is important to keep in mind especially when giving an argument in front of a certain audience. Similar to beliefs, values are personal, therefore they can be shared and related to the decision makers in an argument making the claim gain adherence, which is crucial in an argument. Going back to the ideas of spheres and how they all have specific belief systems and that each sphere a person might be trying to reach will adhere to certain claims over others, well this is similar. Values are personal, and can get

Values are defined as concepts that an arguer finds desirable that a decision maker can understand. They are used by the arguers with credibility and evidence to justify their main points and goal claim, however values have a variety of characteristics as they fit into different segments of argumentation.Clearly values are a very broad and general topics that have many subsections to it including positive, negative, terminal, abstract, and many more types. A very important concept to this idea of values is the value systems behind an argument. Value systems are explained as a set of several values that are linked to one claim in an argument. Clyde Kluckhohn calls these “value orientations” as well, which are “generalized and organized conceptions… of the desirable and non-desirable” (“Values” 411). Value systems are very interesting as they factor into all individual argument and play a vital role for decision makers, especially if the argument is about a desirable or undesirable t

For this chapter I want to focus on the differences in values between science and religion. As a person who respects other people's beliefs but disagrees strongly with religion, I have always had a hard time defining what makes the two so hard to reconcile. This chapter illuminated at least some things for me. I think concept of hard versus abstract values is an important distinction. While science is a process that is fluid - continues working and refining itself - religion delivers firm values that people would prefer. Instead of saying "we don't know what happens to people after they die" religion provides a firm definition. Likewise, instead of saying "it's uncertain what the best way to live looks like" religion gives a tangible blueprint of what it means to live in a righteous way. The most interesting thing that I found is the idea of acknowledging both spheres when making an argument. Finding the places where religion and science can coexis

In my own words value is the reason behind something. When I think of a value statement for a company I think about why the company does what it does. When I think about a value in an argument it's normally what that person cares about. This even is a factor in a physical item, when you value something in your life or an object it normally means you care about that thing deeply or that you love that item. This is the same when talking about a value in an argument. Sometimes the value is going to be explicitly said and sometimes the speaker or the writer just assumes that their audience will fill in the desired value. What's interesting about values, is almost every argument will have at least one but some arguments can have multiple. An example of a possible value would be: "Smoking a vape is hazardous to your health. " I am explicitly stating that smoking a vape is harmful for a person and it can be implied then that I don't agree with smoking a vape. It also can

I thought this chapter was very interesting and extremely pertinent in today's sociopolitical climate. I think the text provides a good base for what values are, but in reality, they are much, much more complicated than that. The obvious examples that come to my mind for values are the values that may politicians base campaigns on. They brand themselves by their values, which they feel will appeal to voters that they have a chance of swaying in their favor. Their opponents often attack their values and try to point out flaws or discrepancies. This is often seen in attack ads run by politicians that attempt to undermine the voters' confidence in the other candidate's values and ethics. Ethics are rooted in values and play a hugely important role in argumentation and decision making. The proper definition of what ethics is what people believe to be morally right or morally wrong. However, because many people have different values, there can be differences in what people see a

One of the concrete values I hold is that I only buy kosher meat. It is ethical for Jewish people to eat kosher meat; it is the good and right thing to do. However, like the book suggests, my religious values are (as a mostly secular Jew) up against other values I hold. These other values stem from being an American, a Westerner, and a person who enjoys philosophy (and not solely Jewish philosophy.) My value system is thus often forced to be hierarchical and the tradition I have of eating kosher is sometimes thrown up against the value I hold of being respectful to others. There are times when I have eaten non-kosher meat out of respect for my hosts or simply because consuming only kosher food is not on the top of my value hierarchy. It is interesting then, that values which I hold both because of my faith and because of non-religious influence, fall to the top of my value hierarchy. An example of this is giving to charity. Since giving to charity is a value that can be found both in t

In this chapter we talk about values. There are all sorts of values but something that also plays into values is ethics. Ethics are a huge part of society including politics. The book describes ethics as "the theory between right and wrong. It also says that ethics should define how we behave towards one another. It continues to say that decision makers should be protected from unethical arguers and that some unethical arguments is denying someone freedom of speech, to tell things you know not to be true, to be unfair to an opponent and more. Over the years, there has been lots of ethic issues in politics such as Trump becoming president because of his ethics. A lot of people don't agree with his morals and personal ethics. He also didn't tell the truth many times and that made it unfair for his opponent. Another one is the Kavanuagh case. This had tons of ethical issues in it. Like is Kavanaugh telling the truth about his past? Is telling the truth about his future? W

This reading talked lots of things about values. In the beginning, we can get the definition of values – “what is desirable that arguers use and decision makers understand”. From this definition, there are some specific things that we need to focus on. “desirable”, “arguers use” and “decision makers”. Then reading concept gave us some basic introduction of values. It did not give very exact thing about values. But I still can get some point from it.    What is more, the reading provides some categories of values. 1)Positive and Negative values, 2) Terminal and Instrumental values and 3) Abstract and Concrete Values. As to me, these things are very interesting to me. Especially for terminal and instrumental values, I really like this category! I agree with this sentence that values will reflect the ends a person admires(wealth, health, happiness, security) or the means to attain the ends(hard work, faith, helpfulness, responsibility). I strongly support that. Values can represent man

 Chapter 8 of the text discusses in detail how arguments can be supported by values in addition to evidence etc. The text makes a distinction between the two types of values: stated values and implied values. Stated values are direct the text provides examples of freedom, health, and wealth. These words are a direct statement of the value, therefore they are stated values. The other kind of value is implied values. The textbook defines implied values as: values that are not explicitly stated. The examples of this that the book includes are: equality, science, and self-respect. Values are important to defining arguments and why they are good or bad etc. The text also describes positive and negative values. Values can be either positive or negative and arguments can be made for an idea by either associating it with positive values or against it by associating it with negative values. I think that the use of values to define arguments is very interesting and looking at our world we can

Values are an important part of argumentation not only because of how they relate to pathos but how they relate to ethos as well. A person’s credibility in an argument can be one of the most important factors to decision makers, and often times a person’s set of values can disqualify them in the eyes of decision makers in certain spheres. For example, the book says that the dominant value system in the United States is the enlightenment value system, which focuses on intellectual freedom and an individual’s ability to discover the natural laws of life. So, if a person in an argument uses language that suggests they hold values contrary to the enlightenment value system, they could be viewed as not credible in the eyes of decision makers from our culture. This principle can apply to individual arguments as well, as a person’s set of values could hurt their credibility in discussion a certain topic. For example, a person who holds the values that men are superior to women could be seen

Values are important in argumentation because they are what people ultimately use as the foundation of their decisions. Whether decision makers stick with the values that they come into an argument with or the presenters convince them to adopt new values, the decision reflects the collective values of the decision making group because people prefer not to take actions that violate their own values. Furthermore, when the values held by decision makers do not align, they must make arguments among themselves, but ultimately the decision will reflect some values held within the group. Because of this idea that decisions lie fundamentally on values held by decision makers, they make for good starting points. In situations where values are held commonly among decision makers identifying starting points can be easy, but if not, establishing values to build off of can be an integral part of the argument itself. Understanding the audience and the values that they hold is crucial to the preparat

            In Chapter 8, the authors of the text discuss values. As defined by Clyde Kluckhohn, “‘A value… is a conception… of the desirable that influences the selection from available nodes, means and ends of action” (as cited in Rieke, Sillars, & Peterson, 121). The text further explores how we evaluate values on an individual basis and how we evaluate values grouped together in value systems. Value systems appear as linked claims, and we can evaluate them based on how compatible individual values are in specific systems to determine how strong or weak an argument is (Rieke, Sillars, & Peterson, 124). I find that we see the strongest arguments come when we perceive a sense of unity between values in these systems from which someone is arguing. The sensational way that the values are codependent on each other intrigues me the most.             An extreme case of this can be seen in situations of hypocrisy, where someone makes an argument that strongly represents one value,

Values come in many different forms that are up to the individual to decide if they give value to something or not, and because of this it is often difficult at times for arguers to persuade and evidence can be used to help justify their claims. These values that the arguers use can be associated with positive and negative values that they give to their argument in order to either support or attack an argument. For example, using negative words or phrases like random or chance, or positive ones like certain and creative, are used to associate your argument with values that you may have. Values are not limited to intangible words but can also be concrete examples such as the person, group, or object to provide you with an example of an evidence that is easy to comprehend because of it’s attributes or values it/they have as an individual or unit. Values are very complex and layered, and are more than likely different from person to person and country to country. They are a mixture o

Chapter 8 discusses the concept of values and how they are used by arguers with credibility and evidence to support claims. Additionally, values are usually implied and are general concepts that “define what arguers and decision makers believe are desirable” (Peterson et al, pg. 73). In other words, values tend to be ideas or believes that the audience/arguers support or side themselves with. Another important element to consider is how values appear in systems, they usually don’t stand alone. For example, when individuals argue racism, they don’t just focus on one issue, but instead include numerous values that make up the unified system. Reading about these value systems helped me realize how presenting just one value to support a claim is not sufficient. In order to create a strong argument that includes values as a means of support, numerous related values must be considered and presented as a system to the decision makers. On the other hand, it is also important to evalu

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 the sam

In chapter 8, the authors discuss values in argumentation.  All arguments have values in their developments and may serve as support for claims or be claims themselves.  Also, a value maybe implicit or explicit, but is distinctive of an individual or group.  Furthermore, values are the grounds and warrants by which decision makers use to aid in their decisions making processes.  The section that I found to be the most interesting in the reading was values and science in argumentation.  Scientific argument explains how physical, biological, human, and social entities function and interact, in essence showing that there is some order to phenomena.  The values of science are order, usefulness, prediction, rationality, and knowledge.  So, I found this section of the reading to be the most interesting because I am most likely to believe an argument if it is support by science.  I am most likely to believe these arguments because scientific evidence must undergo many processes and evaluatio

In this blog post I will talk about values. "Values, are concepts of what is desirable, that arguers use and decision makers understand. Arguers use them with credibility and evidence to justify claims." Some statements of value concepts are direct and are called stated values. but values are not always explicitly stated, however they are implied and are also known as belief statements. They are often proceeded buy the phrase we believe that. The author gives an example of equality; Equal pay for Equal work. (stated value) and Women deserve the same pay as men for the same work (implied value).               But something that came to my mind was how implied values can also be negative. The example that came to my mind was that “I am a feminist” (stated value). It has many implied values; one being that women should be treated equally as men. But another implied value that people believe about feminism is that women who are anti- men or don’t like men. I think it is really

When I began reading this chapter, I didn't realize how many types of values there are. I thought that values were simply what people thought was important. However, this chapter introduced me to new concepts and ideas centered around the concept of values. Terms such as stated/implied values, positive/negative values, terminal/instrumental values and abstract/concrete values were all new to me. While I found all of these terms new and interesting, the ones that caught my attention the most were positive and negative values. Specifically, I thought that it was interesting how they can be used in an argument. Upon reading the title of that section, I figured that positive values were things that were good that we would want to play off of in an argument, and negative values were either contradictory values, or values that many people don't hold, and I thought they were things that one would want to stay away from in an argument. For example, I were to make an argument about fr

In chapter 8, we start to learn how values play important role in arguments. According to the textbook, a value is referred to as “a conception of the desirable that influences the selection from available modes, means and ends of action” (Pg. 121). Values are used in the development of all argumentation even though some argumentation is not obviously based on values. One of my misunderstandings about the universal of values was corrected after I learned that all three kinds of claim have values involved. Even factual claim has statements about laboratory observations implies the values of knowledge and rationality. The chapter continues to talk about characteristics of values, how values appear in systems, and several principles for the use of values. We should also remember that these practices are affected by a realization that the value systems differ from sphere to sphere. Values in argumentation could be characterized in stated/implied, terminal/instrumental, positi

          Chapter eight informs us about the importance of values in our arguments. Values are defined as “a conception of the desirable that influences the selection from available modes, means and ends of action” (Rieke, Sillars, & Peterson, 121). In other words, values guide us to make decisions that we perceive to be good for us. While people often assume that good arguments are backed by credibility or evidence, values are equally as important in determining the grounds and warrants that people use to grant adherence to a claim (Rieke, Sillars, & Peterson, 121).             The values that people hold fall into multiple categories. Each category, if understood and utilized effectively by argument makers, could be extremely beneficial in gaining adherence. The first category of values is stated and implied values. Stated values are direct and explicit. When mentioned, people know immediately what value is being referred to. Implied values are discerned from an understan

This chapter was helpful in understanding how values play a role in argumentation. According to the textbook, a value is "Is a conception... of the desirable that influences the selection from available modes, means, and ends of action" (Pg. 121). Although values have a means to an end, there are several different forms in which values can help an argument. For example, terminal and instrumental values, these two forms will reflect the ends of what a person desires. With terminal values being the most central kind of value system for an individual it opens the opportunity for an argument to be made. For example, if I made an argument that supported my values that being lazy is a result of lack of responsibility this would be a based off an instrumental value. But if I said that being responsible leads to a sense of accomplishment then I have made the argument that valuing responsibility is a terminal value. The end goal is to have a sense of accomplishment and being responsib

In chapter 8, we began talking about values and how they affect arguments. Not all arguments are based off values but they can be. For instance, many people argue what they think is right and what they believe in. This factors into an argument because this is hard to overcome in my opinion because some people are so determined that their values are right. They do not want to hear the opposing side of the argument. Values in an argument can either be stated or implied. I think implied values are what people normally see in arguments. People normally do not explicitly state their beliefs, they normally just say things that let you know what they believe in. For example, when someone states, “Women deserve the same pay as men for the same work.” This shows that they obviously believe in justice and rights for women. For instance, they didn’t have to state out what they actually believe in but the statement they made allowed you to see it. Values can sometimes act as a very credible sourc

Chapter 7 of the text examines the various forms of evidence that can be presented in support of an argument. It defines predominantly three kinds: examples, statistics, and testimony. The text defines examples as “undeveloped instances used in an argument by generalization.” Examples are of course things that have really happened. So using them in an argument is a way of confronting someone with a piece of reality they may not be totally accepting of. Statistics are numerical in nature and constitute summaries of examples. Numbers can often be more convincing than mere anecdotes in an argument and can be used to really bolster an argument. Testimony is of course a direct statement taken from another person in support of an argument. Attaching an example to a person can be quite useful in supporting an argument. I think that these types of evidence are extremely interesting to look at in the context of political debates. Arguments are made in the political area perhaps more than anyw

Chapter 7 of Argumentation and Critical Decision Making talks about the different types of support available in argumentation. Specifically, this chapter covers the use of evidence to strengthen the arguments and get them adherence by the decision makers. Evidence can be separated into three subcategories - examples, statistics and testimony. One key point that the book touches on is using current examples and statistics. The authors go on to explain that up-to-date information is far more powerful than older information when it comes to argumentation. I found statistics to be the most fascinating topic mostly because they give a numerical value to arguments. Earlier in the book we were explained that people have a natural tendency to move away from uncertainty and latch on to what is the most likely or stable outcome. Statistics inherently create more certainty in the argumentation because they give hard numerical facts and often address the probability of outcomes. In other words, th

This week's chapter was all about examples. I've always thought that examples were an interesting element of argument because they can be used for a variety of things. They are often used to persuade to agree with you. I've found that the most effective way to use an example to convince someone to see the point you're trying to make is if you make an example that related to them. That way, they are forced to think about it from a personal perspective. This chapter also talks about how credibility can play a large part in examples. The example that the book lists mentions that someone mentioned that a certain list came from NASA. NASA is seen as a credible organization, so the example has more weight when making a case for a certain point. I also think that logos can play a large part in examples. The text mentions statistics as something that are often used in examples. Raw numbers are often thought to be solid examples because they are concrete. However, numbers can be

Through chapter seven, different forms of evidence is being discussed and how it can help strengthen and bring credibility to an argument. The most typical forms of evidence is statistical and testimonies, these two forms of evidence are also the most reliable ones. Statistical evidence is viewed as credible because accurate numbers usually displays truth. On the other hand you have testimonies, which can be crucial to decide the outcome of any case. Many murder cases are heavily effected by people’s personal testimonies, if one side of the case, say the defendants, are able to bring in a key witness that saw someone committ a murder than their testimony about how it happened would greatly increase the defendants chances of winning the case. However, how a testimony is delivered is also important, in order to create credibility one would have to have the information organized and be able to present the testimony in a chronological order. Arguments that succeed in persuading someone, fo

My response for this week will not be a consistent look at chapter 7, but a selective address of a few terms in a random format. "The Sample with Built-in Bias" When reading about this poor use of statistics I am reminded of the way the electoral college works in the United States. The "sample with built-in bias" may appear at first to be an acceptable statistic, but actually contains a specific lean. In a similar way, people would like to believe that the electoral college reflects the popular vote, when in reality, it can be far from it. The example in the book demonstrates bias in a statistic because many people chose not to answer a survey question. The result was a statistic that conveniently ignores a problem possibly with the question. Similarly, in our elections, people might draw the conclusion that Donald Trump won the popular vote, or even came significantly close. The electoral college, however functions much like the "built-in bias." Donald

Chapter 7 focused on evidence, and how different types of evidence can be effective forms of support. In my opinion, the most effective form of evidence is personal experience, or evidence that speaks to the relevancy of decision makers’ lives. Using personal experience can be effective in arguments because usually, people don’t care about statistics, or at the very least find them difficult to rationalize. This is even more true if someone’s own personal experience acts as evidence in contrast of statistics. For example, the Department of Motor Vehicle Safety claims that in 2016, 10,497 people died from alcohol related driving crashes, accounting for 28% of all traffic deaths in the United States. This statistic shows that a significant number of deaths result from drunk driving, and the dangers of drunk driving are well communicated across all forms of media. The Department of Motor Vehicles certainly has credibility when it comes it discussing traffic deaths, and so it would stand

Throughout chapter 7, different forms of evidence and support were explained and used in various forms of argumentation. One form of argument that is used across many different areas of communication, science, mathematics, and more is the use of statistics. There are various forms of statistics such as inferential, descriptive, and more, however our book describes it as numerical summaries that provide means for talking about large groups. A very popular form of statistics that applies is the political polling that goes on before elections to get a general sense of what the upcoming elections will be like. Political polls are also a good example because the references they make are clearly intended to emphasize the numbers and percentages of different demographics like state, political party, ethnicity of voters, and much more. There are several aspects of statistics that also play into the political polls such as raw numbers, central tendencies, probabilities, and trends. In refere