Skip to main content

Blog post 5 Chapter 6

Content from Chapter 4 is not persuasive enough, if we want to be persuasive, we should have a “case,” which can be called as presentations, essays, blogs and so on. Just like the author stated, “when people make arguments that they want others to take seriously, they develop more elaborated combinations of claims and support put together in a way that is meant to be persuasive (P.83).”
In this post, I will emphasize the preliminary steps in case building.

The first step is to find your ultimate purpose in your case, what’s your expectation look like. For example, I want to start a cult; my ultimate purpose is making people take me as a god. The second step is to state the proposition. Sating a proposition is to make an expression of judgment and ask decision makers to accept or reject. The proposition should be contributed/have a positive impact on your ultimate purpose. Otherwise, your proposition means nothing. For example, when I want people to worship me as a god, stating a common topic is necessary. Life is so hard outside, come to Yi’s Valley! This is a community ruled by Yi, which infinite approach to the Utopian world. Free ice-cream for everybody, free parking, free shoes. In this case, most people would say yes to Yi’s Valley. However, if I phrase my proposition in another way: Come to Yi’s Valley and make Yi a god! Most people would reject immediately and identify me as an idiot. The Third step is assessing presumptions and burden of proof. According to the author, “Your proposition and introduce the concept of burden of proof to describe the challenge to overcoming presumption (P.86).” Cutting a long story short, assessing presumption and burden of proof is to have a plan b argument. For example, what If someone question that I am starting a cult? A cult leader never called herself/himself a cult leader; I would have a plan b argument which shows that I am not a cult. My community offers free stuff to people, not poisoning people. Cults are toxic, my community is not .

Comments

  1. Sadie WollerOctober 17, 2018 at 8:34 AM

    Yi I like how you use a cult for an example, made me laugh. It however worked well with the steps of case building. I think that you could of also related this to a current event of some sort such as the Kavanaugh Case that the the ultimate purpose for Kavanaugh is to become a Supreme Court Judge and his proposition is that he is a good man and didn't commit sexual assault many years ago. That he's done a lot of good and respectable things. His burden of proof would be along the lines of the it was several years ago, people's perceptions and thoughts change, how could you believe it's true?
    There are probably many other examples as well but that was one that you could of related it too.

    ReplyDelete

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