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, they tell us how likely an event is to occur based on past experiences which are typically recorded among large groups of people. I think this principle really connects with decision makers and makes propositions more likely to gain adherence. Connecting this principle to real life. LED light bulb companies use statistics all the time in their advertising. These statistics typically tell consumers how long their light bulbs last versus the competition or how much less electricity they use. These numbers help people eliminate uncertainty when they are shopping for new lights. They can buy the fluorescent lighting or LED lighting that the company says uses one third of the electricity according to their statistics. The consumer might become more confident in the outcome of their LED purchase versus buying the traditional light bulb based on such an advertisement and therefore give adherence to the LED bulb company in the form of a purchase.
In Chapter 9, the authors of the text discuss credibility. The text remarks that credibility is not only able to serve as a claim in argumentation, but it also plays a significant role as a means to support a claim (Rieke, Sillars, & Peterson, 142). The text then goes into detail about characteristics and forms of credibility but finally goes over the general principle the authors suggest for the use of credibility. Credibility can be incredibly subjective, but there are still some general principles of credibility that can apply to most situations. The principle I found to stand out the most in the group of principles the authors presented was the principle of developing credibility from reputation. Reputation is the credibility someone possesses with decision makers before they argue (Rieke, Sillars, & Peterson, 147). When I think of reputation in argument, I always manage to think of the polarized reputation of Donald Trump. There is a significant amount of people who hat
I completely agree with your explanation of how statistics can be a very powerful form of evidence. Personally, I am an individual who is often persuaded by appeals to logic rather than appeals to emotion. I enjoy looking at numbers and understanding empirically collected data. Thus, statistics work very well for arguments against me. Your example of how LED light bulb companies often use statistics to gauge their products against the competition is an accurate identification of how statistics can be used to one’s advantage. The text states that statistics “can be more useful if compared” (Rieke, Sillars, & Peterson, 114). In other words, when raw numbers from one product are measured against another, there is no clearer way to illustrate the differences between the two. However, expanding on the use of statistics, I believe that users of this form of evidence need to be wary of the ways that statistics can be used to mislead the audience. Drawing on the example of advertising electrical products, if a company claims that, “9 in 10 households preferred their product over their competitors”, the statistics could be reflected to show that 90% of customers would buy from that company over others. However, if only 20 families were surveyed, and 18 out of the 20 liked the product, the “90%” statistic is, nonetheless, flawed. Unrepresentative samples often create flaws like the example given. Hence, competent buyers should always question the statistics presented by companies, and seek out their samples.
ReplyDeleteSource:
Rieke, R.D., Sillars, M.O., & Peterson, T.R. (2013). Argumentation and critical decision making. 8th ed., New York: Pearson.
I think that in your post you describe and detail statistics very well and make a lot of good points that I agree with and think are very accurate. Statistics are one of the more interesting ways to support an argument in my opinion. The ability of stats to give numerical value to arguments is very interesting and can potentially be very compelling. Of course we learned that people tend to move away from uncertainty as you mentioned and towards more stable arguments. Statistics having a numerical value of course provide an argument that is very stable and perhaps easy to believe. The example of stats in advertising is good. Advertisers often use statistics to sway consumers effectively even if they don’t entirely understand what the significance or meaning of those stats is. Statistics are certainly fascinating.
ReplyDelete