Skip to main content

Chapter- 11 Blog Post


In this chapter, the author talks about refutation by fallacy claims. He talks about the different types of fallacies and how they are used in argumentation. He defines a fallacy claim as “one that asserts that an argument must be rejected because it violates a significant rule of argumentation relevant to the appropriate decision makers.” In this blog post I will particularly focus on the Ad Hominem Fallacy. It is defined as “when people turn their criticism against a person rather than the person’s ideas.” The author gives the example of how we unconsciously use the ad hominem fallacy when listening to argument by attractive people and tend to believe them more than unattractive people just based on their looks. He also gives an example of how people might blame and start threatening all Muslims in a city upon learning that the shooting in the city mall was done by a Muslim immigrant.

              These examples led me to think of the most common example of Ad Hominem attack in our present world. President Trump seems to often be a victim of the Ad Hominem attack because of his racist comments on immigrants from different countries based on their racial or religious background. As well as his conservative views on abortion rights and his stance on gun rights. His racist and polarizing views often make led to people not believing his policies or doubting his intentions because of his certain actions in the past. His policy and stance on the TPS (Temporary Protected Status) is a great example of an Ad Hominem attack. President Trump wants to get rid of the TPS for people who are safe to go back to their home countries. The TPS is a humanitarian effort to protect people and give them refuge in case of life threatening situations in their home countries. Since, the condition in most of these countries are better and it is safe for the refuges to go back, President Trump wants those refugees to go back. But because of the President’s remarks about immigrants most people believe that the policy to get rid of TPS is racial motivated act making him a victim of the ad hominem attack. where in reality the President is not the only one responsible to draft this policy and their are other legal departments such as the Homeland Security which people are not aware of or in other words ignorant of. 

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

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

Case Building

Chapter 6 of Argumentation and Critical Decision Making focuses on the steps required in building a case. Among the concepts that are discussed, visualization stands out as one of the most important. On page 101, the authors even state “Powerful arguments are only half of the job in preparing a case or presentation. The other half is developing a convincing vision through which you can tell the story of your ultimate purpose” In other words, having a great argument alone is not going to necessarily gain you adherence. Instead, it needs to be supplemented with a story that vividly shows the decision maker the outcome if they were to agree to the proposition.   The chapter goes on to say that to create a powerful vision you must know the decision maker’s narrative of the subject you are arguing about. The example that is given is college. Some decision makers might have had the greatest time of their lives in college during which they made a ton of friends and found love. On the ...
1 comment
Read more