Fallacy Concepts That Need More Practice/Depth: Slippery Slope

The slippery slope was a bit confusing for me to understand as I was reading the description of it in the Epstein text. It is defined as a "chain with conditionals where at least one of them is false or dubious." I am pretty sure that practicing on identifying any slippery slope fallacies in an argument will help me understand and notice these fallacies better. Yet, it is difficult for me at times to determine whether the conditional is really false or dubious because there are conditionals that sound so convincing to me that I cannot be too sure to mark it as a slippery slope fallacy.

As I researched online to find more in depth information about a slippery slope fallacy, I learned that it is an illegitimate use of the "If...then" claim because it causes people to think "that one thing must lead to another." In reality, this is not necessarily true.

For example:
If Macy takes one puff of a lit up cigarette, then she will become addicted to smoking.

Just because Macy takes one puff of a burning cigarette, it does not mean that she will get addicted to smoking. That one puff could cause her to detest smoking and to never try it again.

I also found a very helpful tip: "Check your argument for chains of consequences, where you say "if A, then B, and if B, then C," and so forth. Make sure these chains are reasonable." This tip reminded me of the Check process of a math problem after I completed it in order to make sure that the answer I got was actually correct. This tip is a great tool on justifying whether an argument can be plausible or if it has fallen under a slippery slope.

http://www.logicalfallacies.info/presumption/slippery-slope/
http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html

Numero 2

I enjoyed the second assignment, Critical Thinking and Social Organizations, because it motivated me to look up organizations that I was familiar with, but not quite knowledgeable about. Also, I got to work with the same people from the first group paper, so it was more comfortable and easy-going to communicate with each other when breaking up the parts of the paper for each person to work on.

As a group, we decided to analyze PETA. All of us knew about PETA and their mission to protect animal rights, however we wanted to explore the other key focuses of PETA through their videos, campaigns, and advertisements. PETAs website had a good amount of fallacies, claims, and arguments regarding the protection of animals and it really let me reflect on the concepts I learned throughout this course.

PETA is very good at using pathos, which is an appeal to emotion, in their advertisements and videos. I was happy to be able to identify the pathos in videos that showed animals being skinned for their fur and sick cow being pushed by a forklift in order for them to stand upright. Their words to describe the issue they are fighting for is very captivating and descriptive: "Every day in countries around the world, animals are fighting for their lives. They are enslaved, beaten, and kept in chains to make them perform for humans' "entertainment"; they are mutilated and confined to tiny cages so that we can kill them and eat them; they are burned, blinded, poisoned...." PETA's message against animal cruelty helped me decide whether their arguments were valid or good and if they can be deemed plausible and made me realize how powerful using pathos as a tactic to convince people can be.

Ch. 8 = General Claims & Vague Generalities

General Claims involve the word "all" or "some." Claims that consist of these words can make a claim appear valid, but in actuality, the claim may be too general and there could be other possibilities that could make the claim invalid.

For example:
All elementary school and junior high school kids pee in the public pools.

All is "every single one, no exceptions,... and their is at least one." (Epstein 160). So, in the above example there is no way that none of the elementary and junior high school do not pee in public pools. At least one has got to.

This claim is invalid because not all elementary school and junior high school kids pee in the public pools.
----
Some on the other hand is "at least one, but all." (Epstein 160).

I will stick with the same example so it does not get confusing:

Some elementary school and junior high school kids pee in the public pools.

In this case, not all elementary and junior high school kids pee in the public pools, just some.
Using "some" in a claim is very vague because it is not backed up by a number or statistic, which prevents a claim from getting precise.


Vague generalities do not involve numbers in a claim.

For example:

• Most of the students who play badminton in high school are Asian.
• Almost all college students have tasted alcohol.
  
• Very few toddlers enjoy eating brussel sprouts.
  
• All brown bears hibernate during the winter season.
• Many of the students attending San Jose State are commuters.

Although the words "some" and "all" are classified as vague when put into a claim, they can be valid as long as there is "enough precision" (Epstein 171). If the premises are convincing enough to make the conclusion plausible, then the argument is valid.

Almost all S are P
a is S ---> Usually Strong (Epstein 171)
So a is P

For example:
Very few Killer Whales do not squeal.
Shouka is a Killer Whale.
So Shouka squeals.

What I Learned From Chapter 6 & Have Not Mentioned: Conditionals & Their Contradictories

I realized that I experience conditional promises throughout daily life, especially amongst my teachers.

My psychology teacher at SJSU tells me:
"If you come to class everyday, then I will give you 100% on your participation grade."

This claim is only a conditional one because my teacher will only give me 100% if I attend class everyday. She has not promised to do such a thing unless I follow through with her request. Essentially, if I only show up to class 50% of the time I will not get the full participation grade.

Not all conditional claims involve "If...then..."
For instance:

"Give me $50 and I will forgive you for breaking my lamp."

Nonetheless, each conditional has an antecedent, which is the A in a claim, and a consequent, which the B in a claim.

"If..(A)...then..(B).." or "A and B" --> As seen in my previous example of not all conditional claims being "If...then..."




Then, there's a contradictory of a conditional, which is:
"If" A, "then" B has contradictory A "but not" B. (Epstein 121). The contradictory generally uses "although" , "even if" or "despite that."

*Keep in note that a contradictory of a conditional is not another conditional. (Epstein 122).

An example would be:

Conditional Claim: If Kristine practices dunking the basketball in the basketball hoop, then she will be able to dunk the ball into the hoop.

Contradictory of a Conditional: Even if Kristine practices dunking the basketball in the basketball hoop, then she will not be able to dunk the ball into the hoop.

Ch.7: Attempts To Refute That Are Bad Arguments -> Ridicule

When reasoning with an argument, ridicule is a form of reasoning that is irrational and needs to avoided. Epstein describes ridicule as a "worthless device in rational discussion." (Epstein 151). It mocks others and minimizes the length of an argument because of the belittlement involved in ridicule.

I've heard conversations amongst teens in high schools and even college students that involve ridicule. Some of the ridicule I hear in conversations make me disgusted and shocked that such words and thoughts could come out of a person's mouth. I can try to reason with the person initiating ridicule, but sometimes that person may be stubborn and stuck with their old habits. This stubborness often leads me to end the conversation because it's not worth getting frustrated with arguing with such a person.

An example of ridicule I have witnessed dealt with generalizations about ethnicity:

Jace: My work hired 15 new Indian employees that are really good at creating semi-conductor boards.

Rich: They must also be good at stinking up the whole company and they probably leave a stench on the boards too. Whose going to want to buy those?

Jace: They're really nice and don't need to be insulted like that Rich. I don't need to listen to your judgments like this.


It was extremely unnecessary for Rich to insult and generalize Indians as smelly people that stink up Jace's workplace. This in turn made Jace irritated with Rich and cause him to be intolerable with Rich's irrational and rude comments.

CH.6: Compound Claims & The Contradictory of a Claim

I didn't know that one claim could essentially be made up of two or more claims. I always viewed a sentence with multiple claims as a multiple claim, but after reading about compound claims, it is "one claim composed of other claims." (Epstein 113). A compound claim may include an "or" option in the claim in order to link two claims to create a compound. "The claims that are parts of" a claim that has "or" is called an alternative. (Epstein 114). Yet, not all sentences are compound claims. If the indicator in the sentence is an argumentative one, such as "because," then the sentence becomes an argument.

Here is an example of a compound claim:

"I'll either meet up with you on Friday night after work or visit you when you work on Mondays' at Home Depot."

This is one claim consisting of two claims. Although I have not promised to do fulfill either of the things I may do above, thus it is just one claim.

______________

In addition to compound claims, are the contradictory of a claim, which is opposite of what the initial claim has stated. The contradictory of claim is also know as a "negation of a claim." (Epstein 114). This concept of contradictory of a claim was fairly easy and clear for me to understand. It was also fun trying to make up a contradictory of a claim I had made up.

Here are two examples of a contradictory of a claim:

Claim: Ricardo wins in basketball games.

Contradictory: Ricardo does not win in basketball games.


Claim: Abby does not want to go shopping at Stanford Shopping Center.

Contradictory: Abby wants to go shopping at Stanford Shopping Center.


Here is an example of a contradictory of an "or" claim
([Neither] A "or" B has contradictory "not" A "and not" B):

Claim: Jacobson will learn how throw a baseball, or he will not be the pitcher.

Contradictory: Jacobson will not learn how throw a baseball, and he will be the pitcher.

Repairing Arguments

People who smoke cigarettes have yellow teeth. Arc has yellow teeth, so he is a smoker.

It is true that people who smoke cigarettes most likely get yellow teeth and stains due to the tar build up. So the argument partially makes sense in this case, but it still weak because it's generalizing that every person who conveniently has yellow teeth is bound to be a smoker. There is not enough evidence to prove that Arc actually smokes cigarettes just because he has yellow stains on his teeth. The fact that his teeth are yellow could be the cause of other sources, such as not brushing his teeth thoroughly, drinking tea or coffee, and/or gradual plaque build-up. This argument cannot be repaired because I can't add what I may think is causing his yellow teeth. It would just be making something up or guessing in order to make this a strong or valid argument.