Skip to main content

Chapter 5

This chapter finally dove into more of what I was expecting to be learning in this course; the  basis on which we create and evaluate claims. Evaluating claims is something everyone is constantly doing. In order to make a decision, you must first evaluate the costs and benefits of all outcomes and decide which claim will prove the most beneficial to you.
Now, this chapter takes things much deeper than day to day decision making. This chapter points out that there are some claims that are much more difficult to evaluate, and that, "On such claims there are potentially an infinite number of related arguments because by one chain of reasoning or another, all potential arguments can be related." When you're facing the potential to spend infinite amount of time putting data from all sides of an argument together, it helps to be able to break down and label the important categories of the argument that will allow you to organize a claim's structure. For example, the book lists one of the first steps in analyzing claims is to "Identify the Question". This entails thinking about the issue at hand and asking questions to help evaluate it's merit. By thinking about how a claim may be viewed, understood, or accepted by others, it allows you to direct your chain of thinking in alignment with how others can most relate to the claim.
Being able to take a full scope perspective when analyzing arguments allows for an even better established decision on the merits of a claim. Understanding the basis of how we form arguments, how we support them, refute them, and determining how they matter to us creates a deeper connection an understanding of issues that we must make decisions on in the world today.


Richard D. Rieke, Malcolm O. Sillars, Tarla Rai Peterson. " Chapter 5 Analysis in Argumentation ". Argumentation and Critical Decision Making, 8/e Pearson. 72. RedShelf

Comments

  1. AnonymousOctober 8, 2018 at 3:09 PM

    Lucas, I certainly agree that the analytical tools mentioned in the text go beyond the level of analysis that is required in every day decision-making. This sentiment is echoed by the authors who suggest that “Many other situations involving your health and well being, and the lives of others including matters of public policy produce claims that require more extensive justification” (Rieke, Sillars, & Peterson, 71). Indeed, these tools are especially relevant to big decisions in our lives that have the potential to significantly affect our future. While we are used to having major life decisions decided for us by our parents, many of us are entering an age where we are forced to not only make our own decisions, but convince the people we care about to do the same as well. For example, while my parents used to explain to me issues on the news, they have started to turn to me, as a Political Science major, for advice on politics. Being able to explain to them my thoughts, and advancing propositions, is something that this chapter has equipped me with. Going off what you said about aligning our propositions with the views of our audience, I have started to identify issue areas that interest my parents. I have found that they are more willing to accept my propositions if it relates to an issue that they feel strongly about. Hence, you are absolutely right in saying that the first step in any critical analysis is to identify the specific questions that would be useful to ask, in light of the known information about the audience.

    Sources:
    Rieke, R.D., Sillars, M.O., & Peterson, T.R. (2013). Argumentation and critical decision making. 8th ed., New York: Pearson.

    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