Skip to main content

chap 7


Chapter seven is all about evidence and how it is used. All types of evidence are good in certain situations, but they also have their downfalls. Statistics in argument in particular can be dangerous in that there are many areas in which they can be invalidated. Facets such as sample size, outliers, and other environmental factors that occur in the collection of statistics can all have impacts on the results that may range from slightly swaying to drastically skewing the numbers. Because of this necessarily inconsistent nature of statistics, a good arguer can easily make statistics look like they point to a conclusion that does not actually follow. For this, it is important as a presenter to acknowledge any flaws in the collection as well as the nature of the statistics being referenced, and as a decision maker to understand these inconsistencies and potential motives behind said statistics. Taking, for example, the statistical trend of fewer women having children from the book, had the presenter not discussed the reasons that point to this trend, the audience may have made completely wrong conclusion, perhaps that modern women hate children. While this is not the case, it is helpful that the presenter brought up the notion of women attending university and having jobs that hold greater responsibility. Furthermore, it is useful knowledge to know that this trend was found after looking into 50,000 households. This adds credibility to the statistical trend because the audience can verify that this is a respectable sample size. Statistics can be very useful in argument, but it should be recognized that there is responsibility on both the presenter and the audience members to verify and understand such statistics.

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