Skip to main content

Chapter 10

In this chapter we look at the refutation part of argumentation, according to the textbook refutation is a "Process which one person or faction involved in a decision criticizes arguments advanced by another person or faction" (Pg.156). This is highly important in a decision making process when there are factions who which to see certain things change, therefore criticizing a current state of being in the thing they are refuting against. A common place where this can be seen is in social justice movements. For example, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was the best at criticizing racism in the United States. He made sure that his opinions and voice was heard to all decision makers, which would be someone like the President of the United States. He not only criticized the racism in the US, but the division that it brought to the country. This allowed the decision makers to appeal to the emotional content of his criticism because he would have his fair opportunity to give these opinions. The process in which he did his refutation followed the similarly what the textbook talked about. All the factions involved in this social justice movement had to make a decision if his claims were going to be accepted or not. MLK Jr. had to openly express his disagreement with all the racial injustice going on around the country at the time. This is what refutation is all about, the opportunity for someone to come in and argue against an argument. This allows things that are being claimed to get tested by someone else and either bring light to things that are not true, or strengthen that same argument as well.

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