Need more explination

3). Pick one concept from throughout the semester that you feel can use further discussion.

What I really did not get this semester was the graphs section in the book. I really don't see the reason for graphs in comm 21 critical thinking when i saw the graphs i was kind of turned me off on critically thinking and took my mind to a  math class. I really don't understand why this was in my comm 41book. This could use some more explanation or be excluded from the book. Another concept that i did not get was Arguing backwards. This concept makes sense at time like arguing when back when people when they something you don't agree with like restating what they said but saying it in a way that makes then second guess themselves. Mistaking a person for a claim makes no sense either. A person is a person not a claim and i mean a person could be confused as something their not but not a claim.  

What was your favorite thing about the class? What was your least favorite thing about the class? How can this class be improved? Be specific.

One of my most favorite thing about this class was the fact that it was an online class. I never took an online class before and it was interesting to have done so. I like how we communicate our ideas through the social media website, Blogger.com. I think blogging is a great way for someone to express their ideas and it allows other people to see it and interact with them through comments. It was great how we got to meet up with a group to work on the projects but at the same time it was difficult to have the whole group meet up. There were many times when there were conflicting schedules where a few people couldn't make it to the group meetings. We then would have to communicate with via email or text message but it was hard to get response. But in the end we got good grades on the projects.

What I've learned...

1). What have you learned in this class over the course of the semester?  Be specific.

Over the course of the semester I have learned many things through the Epstein text. The first thing that i am able to recall is how to prove that a claim or statement is valid or invalid. I have learned how to do this by analyzing the information in each statement and seeing if any of the claims are fallacies and or have propaganda in the statement. I also learned about how media uses a lot of the same appeals of emotion such as appealing to ones fears or emotions. An example would be the feed the children commercials they feed to peoples sensitive side and convince them to give to the children. The appeals to fear is a tactic that a lot of political men and or women use in campaigns such as vote for use we will make your world better, the underlining meaning is that ones current life is not good enough which gives people a sense of fear.    

Chapter 15 Concept

3). Pick one concept from the assigned reading (chapter 15), that we have not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.

The concept that I found most interesting in chapter 15 of the Epstein text was "the cause makes a difference." The Epstein text presented an example about a guy name Dr. E who has a fear of elephants. Dr. E believes that if he put up a wind chime on his door, the elephants would stay away. He lives in a very high sea level in Cedar City, Utah in a desert. He believes that the wind chime works cause he has not seen any elephants but it is clear to see that no elephants would ever be near his house. Since he has never seen an elephant since he put up his wind chimes he believes his theory works. But really the wind chime has made no difference. For there to be an effect, there needs to be a cause. "If the cause hadn't occurred, there wouldn't be the effect. Since no elephant appeared in his presence, no effect was created. It is good that we check that the cause makes a difference so we would not look over any other possible cause.

Mission Critical

2). What was useful about the Mission Critical website?

The Mission Critical website was extremely useful because it was very in depth and easy to understand. The outline was so clear and each bullet point directed to a link when clicked upon. This website simply simplified the Epstein Text in one page through links. If one were to use the Epstein book they would have to check the contents and flip through pages to find a certain concept, while this website allows a person to browse through any concept easily. There were many exercises that were provided where I could practice on. The exercises were really helpful too because if I did it wrong the website would correct me and provide me with the right answer and why I got it wrong. Overall, this website is very clear and easy to understand and it is also very descriptive. I believe this website provides many information that one can use as a study guide for tests and for factual information.

Cause and Effect

What was useful about the Cause and Effect website reading and exercises?

The Cause and Effect website reading was very useful. It was much more simplified than the Epstein text and it used one example and went in depth with that. The example was clear and easy to understand and it was also broken down to different parts. The example was about a case case about a bicyclist, illegally parked car, and another car. The truck was illegally parked in the bike lane so the bicyclist had to move to another lane to pass it while a car behind it didn't have time to stop and smashes into the bicyclist. This case is taken to court to settle whose fault it is. Each lawyers can make their own claims about whose fault it is so many claims can be made.
Bicyclists lawyer's claim: If it wasn't for the illegally parked car, the bicyclists wouldn't have to switch lanes to pass it. Therefore, the bicyclist could have stayed in his or her lane and prevented the accident.
First driver lawyer's claim: It's the bicyclist's fault for his or her action that caused the client to slam on the brakes.
Second driver lawyer's claim: It's the first driver fault because the sudden stop caused the client to smash into its back.
These claims are all casual arguments that uses a mixture of "difference" and "commonality" reasoning. These casual arguments show that there is only one significant difference. Overall, this reading was clear and easy to understand because the example was descriptive and easy to analyze.

Analogies in the Law

3). Pick one concept or idea from the assigned reading, that we have not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting, and discuss it.

In chapter 12 of the Epstein text the discussion of analogies in the law was brought up.  In law, analogies are used as detailed and carefully analyzed arguments. It is also used with the important similarities pointed out and a general principle stated. Very often, many laws are vague or a situation would occur where one would not considered to be covered by the law. According to an excerpt by Edward H. Levi, reasoning by example is considered to be the basic pattern of legal reasoning. There is a three-step process in which a proposition descriptive of the first case is made into a rule of law and then applied to a next similar situation.
First Step: similarity is seen between cases
Second Step: next the rule of law inherent in the first case is announced
Third Step: the rule of law is made applicable to the second case  

Difficulty understanding a specific type of reasoning...

2). Sometimes when something is difficult to understand, it becomes a bit clearer when we try to explain it to someone else.  Which type of reasoning was most difficult to understand?  Please do some additional internet research on that specific type of reasoning and discuss what you learned.

This week's blog was a little bit challenging to write because there were no specific text from the textbook to refer to. I had to go on the web and search for answers and help myself. I had the most difficult time understanding deductive reasoning out of all the different types of reasoning given. As I looked further through the web I found a better understanding of what deductive reasoning is. Deduction starts with an assumed hypothesis or theory. This assumption may be well-accepted or it may be a bit shaky. Deduction reasoning is usually used by scientists who take a general scientific law and apply it to a certain case. In most cases they assume the law is true. Deduction reasoning can be used to test induction reasoning. Deductive reasoning assumes that the basic law from which you are arguing is applicable in all cases.

Example: There is a law against smoking. You should stop smoking now.
The assumed hypothesis in this example is that there is a law against smoking. Some people may accept this law but others may just reject it.

Reasonings

1). Read through the different types of reasoning posted to the instructors blog.  Give an example of each type of reasoning outlined on the instructors blog.  The example should be something the folks in class can relate to, so try to use real world examples.
 

1. Reasoning by analogy: If a conclusion to one side of an argument is made then the conclusion on the other side should conclude the same.
Ex: Eating before riding a roller coaster will cause a person to puke. Emily ate a hot dog before she rode the roller coaster, therefore she'll probably puke.

2. Sign Reasoning: Assumes one thing or event is a reliable indicator of another thing or event.

Ex:

Where there is a school, there is a student.

3. Causal Reasoning: Reasoning between a cause and the effects.
Ex: Samantha did not put on sun screen before she went to the beach. Therefore, she got sun burned.

4. Criteria Reasoning: Criteria by which the outcome of a decision will be judged, and then identify the best decision.
Ex:  If you do not take out the trash when it gets full then it will pile up and make your home smell. So you should take out your trash every so often.

5. Reasoning by example: using examples in an argument.
Ex: You should go out more often. I have a friend who used to stay in and was never really happy.

6. Inductive Reasoning: starting from specifics and deriving a general rule.
Ex: All of your friends are good. You can be good, too.

7. Deductive Reasoning: starting from the general rule and moving to specifics.
Ex: Gravity makes things fall. The apple that hit my head was due to gravity.

Appeal to Fear

3). Pick one concept from the assigned reading this week, not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.

The concept, appeal to fear captured my attention in chapter 10. An appeal to fear is another form of appeal to emotion. It is when a person attempts to create support for an idea by using deception and propaganda. One uses these tactics to increase fear and prejudice toward a competitor. The use of appeal to fear is common in marketing and politics.

This fallacy has the following argument form:
Either A or B is true.
B is scary.
Therefore, A is true.

Examples of an appeal to fear:
-If you keep drinking, you will die early as your cousin did.
-If you tell a lie, no one will ever believe you again.
-If you don't graduate from college, you will not be successful.
-If you wear that dress tonight, you will look like a swan.
All these examples is an appeal to fear because many people would fear if any of these examples were said or were to come true. An appeal to pity is used in every day life and when used correctly, it can be a strong arguemnt.

Bad Appeal to Pity

Pertaining to page 195, complete objective 1, 2, 3, 6 OR 7.

 1. Bad Appeal to Pity
Jim: I'm 25 years old and I don't have a job. I am also forced to live with my parents who makes me cook my own food. Can you donate some money to me so I can move out of my parents apartment?
Mike: No, you should find a job and make your own money so you can move out of your parents apartment.

Jim's argument is a bad appeal to pity for many reasons. First off he is 25 years old which means he can go find his own job or try to make money somehow. Secondly, he is not forced to live with his parents and he should be able to cook his own food. Having to cook his own food is not a good enough pity to take upon someone. Anyone would be foolish to donate money to Jim for the reasons that he needs the money for. The argument could have been stronger if he needed the money for a better cause or we knew more valid reasons of why he doe not have a job.

Appeal to Emotion

1). Discuss the idea of Appeal to Emotion. There are different aspects of Appeal to Emotion, which type of Appeal to Emotion strikes you, and why?

There are many kind of emotions that a person can experience. In arguments, emotions plays a huge role. An appeal to emotion  uses the manipulation of the recipient's emotions, rather than valid logic, to win an argument. There are a couple kinds of appeal to emotions such as; appealing to fear and appealing to pity. In this chapter, the appeal to pity catches my attention the most because I have experienced it a lot before. An appeal to pity is a fallacy in which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting his or her opponent's feelings of pity or guilt.

An example of an appeal to pity:
The ASPCA has made many commercials that appealed to pity. A majority of their commercials shows pictures of sad and injured looking dogs and or cats with a sad background song to tag a long. These commercials allows the viewers to feel pity for the poor animals so that they can donate money to the organization. The commercials are pretty convincing because they have really vivid pictures of animals that are injured looking. For example, I have seen one commercial where there was a dog with three legs.

Chapter 8: Generalities

3). Pick one concept from the assigned reading this week, not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.

A concept that I found interesting in Chapter 8 was the concept of generalities. Chapter 8 discusses about two kinds of generalities: precise and vague. Precise generalities deals with more specific and accurate information. It is much clearer whether the statement is true or false when using a precise generality. Vague generalities uses unclear words such as: many, some, and few. Vague generalities are so unclear that most of the time it is considered to be an invalid in arguments or claims.
Example of vague generality:
"Many people will not graduate from UC San Diego."
The word many is vague, and is a subjective amount that varies from person to person.
Example of precise generality:
"40% of students from UC San Diego will not graduate. Therefore, I will not graduate."
This example is more specific in amount but the conclusion can still be false.


There are a lot of ways one can discuss about all or a part of something without being precise or specifying in amount.
Examples of unspecific amount:
All tigers growl.
Almost all tigers growl.
Very few children likes vegetables.

The First Major Course Assignment

2). Discuss the usefulness of the first or second major course assignment. Use specific examples.

The first major course assignment was very useful because we got to interact with a group of people and write about the materials we learned in class. We actually got to discuss the topics that were presented and asked questions that we need answers for in person. It was interesting to see how we would all be able to cooperate and function as a group of strangers. Being able to interact in person made the assignment much easier. We discussed everything in detail and we were able to have a full on discussion with one another. We were also able to establish how to divide the work up and if there were any problems we could just talk it out. If there were any questions about anything someone was always able to answer it. Everyone did their parts because the group grade relied on everyone's participation. Any lack of participation would automatically alter the grade of the group and no one would want to jeopardize that.

Chapter 8: General Claims and Their Contradictories

1). Discuss one concept in Chapter 8 that you found useful. Please explain the concept and give a personal example or personal story.

General claims and their contradictions is mentioned in chapter 8. General claims deals with phrases with "all" and phrases with "some." "All" means "every single one, no exceptions." The phrases "all" and "some" are used differently depending on the argument. There are times when "all" is used as "Every single one, and there is at least one." "Some" means "At least one." Some is sometimes meant as "At least one, but not all." A personal example would be a situation that occurred in high school where I went on a school field trip to the museum. There was a lot of exhibit to cover and many of the students wanted to separate into different exhibits. The teacher did not allow that because he said that all will be together at all times, with no exceptions. Depending on the argument "all" can mean "Every one, and there is at least one" so it is possible that the students could go off on their own in groups. It really depends on how the argument is presented and how one receives the message.

Attempts to refute that are bad arguments

In many cases there are some attempts to refute that are just bad arguments. There are three ways to refute that are bad arguments: slippery slope, ridicule and strawman. A slippery slope may occur when one attempt to reduce to the absurd. A slippery slope argument states that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant effect. Slippery slopes adds false or dubious premises. Ridicule is considered a worthless device. It may cause bitterness amongst whomever is arguing and create enemies. It is hard to tell the difference between reducing to the absurd and ridicule. Sometimes it is hard to distinguish between them because not enough of an argument is given to see how the absurd conclusion follows, which makes it sound like a ridicule.  When it is time to judge whether an argument is a ridicule, a slippery slope or otherwise, one should not reject and start consuming the comments. Once one consumes the comments, one should take it as a challenge to make his or her own arguments better. One of the worst way to refute is use the strawman method. According to the Epstein text a strawman occurs when someone makes a claim, and the other person tries to refute it by putting words in that person's mouth. Overall, one should be prepared to defend their argument at all times. 

Chatper 7 Concepts

Chapter seven in the "Critical Thinking" textbook by Richard L. Epstein discusses about counterarguments. A counterargument is an objection to an objection and it is also known as a rebuttal. A counterargument may seek to doubt on the facts of one or more of the premises presented. The two concepts in chapter 7 that caught my attention are raising objections and refuting an argument. When one raises an objection, it is a way to show that an argument is bad. When one objects then another argument is formed that questions one of the premises. It may also show that a premise is doubtful or that an argument is weak.  There are two ways to refute an argument: directly and indirectly. The direct ways of refuting an argument are: show that at least one of the premises is dubious, show that the argument isn't valid or strong, and show that the conclusion is false. There are times when one cannot decided whether which premises is false or dubious, but one knows that there is something wrong with the premises. In this case one will have to refute indirectly by showing a person's beliefs leading to an unwanted conclusion. Raising an objection and refuting an argument is very common in arguments.

Compound Claims

There are many claims that one may use in an argument. The two concepts that caught my attention in chapter 6 was compound claims and conditionals. Within compound claims there are sub points of it such as: alternative claims, contradictory of a claim, and false dilemmas. According to the Epstein text a compound claim is "one composed of other claims, but which has to be viewed as just one claim." Words can link two or more claims together which can form a compound claim. There are also sentences with two or more claims that are not considered a compound claim. An alternative is a claim that is part of an "or" claim. A contradictory of a claim is one that has the opposite truth-value in all possible circumstances. Another word for contradictory is negation of a claim. A false dilemma is a type of logical fallacy. A false dilemma is a situation that involves two alternatives that are considered, when in fact there are three other options. It is considered a bad use of excluding possibilities where the "or" claim is false or implausible. Claims that are considered conditionals when it can be rewritten as an "if...then..."claims that must have the same truth-value.

Bad Appeals to Authority

A concept in Chapter 5 caught my eyes called, bad appeals to authority. An appeal to authority is when someone accepts a claim just because a person they believe to have an authority to do so have stated the claim. We consider an appeal to authority as a fallacy when:

1. Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S.

2. Person A makes claim C about subject S.

3. Therefore, C is true.  

This concept is interesting because many people tend to believe in something easily, which would also cause many others to follow in their footsteps and believe as well. When people accept claims from people who are not authorities on a subject, then they are mislead and it is considered a bad appeal to authority. There is no justification in a claim if a person is unqualified to do so and or not an expert. Many people considers other people's claim to be true just because they believe that the person stating the claim has the authority in doing so. They are accepting a claim to be true without adequate evidence. There is also a bad appeal to common belief which usually means, that a person mistakenly accepts a claim to be true just because a lot of other people have done so. Just because someone say something is true, it does not mean they are or have the authority to say it is true.

Advertisement on the Internet

'
In this advertisement above, Macy's is advertising that their products are at its "lowest prices of the season." It is hard to believe that this advertisement is true because we do not know if the prices are the lowest compared to other stores. We also do not know if what Macy's compare their prices to. There are many companies with different products and prices and just because Macy's say that their prices are low, it does not mean it is lower than another company's prices. Macy's should specify why their products is at a low price or compare their prices to something else. From my own experience, online shopping is different than shopping at the actual store. There are many products that are at the stores rather than online or even vice versa sometimes. Some prices are different too because some Macy's sell their product their own way. It is hard to trust money transaction online because we do not know for sure if we will receive the products that we purchase. There are many scams for online purchasing and no one wants to get their identity stolen. I personally think that Macy's is a little pricey, even for their sale items. Many people may believe in this advertisement because Macy's is a very huge and well known company, which gives them authority. Macy's is known everywhere like in newspaper, television and magazines. Overall, I have found lower prices on clothing at other stores compared to Macy's.

Week 5 Post 1: Violating the Principle of Rational Discussion

As we already learned previously, the principle of rational discussion is a discussion where we assume the other person who is discussing with us or whose arguments we are reading: knows about the subject under discussion, is able and willing to reason well, and is not lying. We also learned that a fallacy is usually incorrect argumentation in reasoning resulting in a misconception or presumption. There is guide to repair arguments that one can follow. When an argument is given and needs to be repair, we can make it stronger by adding a premise or conclusion if it satisfies all three of the following:

1. The argument becomes stronger or valid.
2. The premise is plausible and would seem plausible to the other person.
3.The premise is more plausible than the conclusion.

If the argument is considered valid or strong, we may then delete a premise if appropriate and if it does not make the argument worse.


Example of an argument that needs repair:
Studying before an exam will help you receive a good grade.
Molly studied the night before.
Therefore, Molly received a good grade.

This argument is considered a good argument but it might not be strong enough because the premises leading to the conclusion is not strong. One may say that anyone that studies for an exam can get a good grade but for some people it is different. Everyone studies differently and studying effects everyone in a different way. One may study a lot but still get a bad grade for many different reasons. A premise can be added like, "Molly studied consistently for many nights and also remembered all the materials that was needed for the test." This argument could have been more specific too so we know what Molly is studying for. Therefore, it is possible for Molly to have received a good grade but it is not definite if she did or not.

Week 3 Post 3: Chapter 11 Concept

The concept that caught my attention this week was structural fallacies. I have never heard of the word fallacies before but now that I know more about it, I realized that I use it a lot. There are many type of fallacies such as; bad appeal to authority, appeal to emotion, false dilemma and many more. An argument is considered a fallacy only if the premises is not to be relied on and no other premises support the conclusion. In order to have a good fallacy one would need to structure it well. Everyone uses fallacy in their everyday life, so learning about fallacy is really important. In this chapter, I  also learned that there are different ways to violate the principle of rational discussion. There are four parts: begging the question, strawman, shifting the burden of proof, and relevance. When begging the question on must convince in their argument that the claim is true. Strawman is most often misinterpreted and can be easily knocked down by putting words into other people's mouth. Relevance is when a premise is irrelevant to the conclusion.

Week 3 Post 2: Fallacies

A fallacy is usually incorrect argumentation in reasoning resulting in a misconception or presumption. While the premises may be true, the conclusion could be false, making it a fallacy. A formal fallacy is an error in logic that can be seen in the argument's form without an understanding of the argument's content.

A bad appeal to authority is a fallacy with the following structure:
1. Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S.
2. Person A makes claim C about subject S.
3. Therefore, C is true.


This fallacy is created when Person A does not have the authority to make claims about subject S. The person in question is not an expert. The claim may be true but because the person making the claim is not qualified to make the claim, the claim can be false. There are no rational reason to accept the claim as true.


Example:
Jack: Do you know the sex of your baby yet?
Jill: I just found out at 1pm today from my psychic Lauren that my baby is going to be a boy. 
Jack: And you believed her? 
Jill: Why of course, why wouldn't I? She's a certified California Master Psychic.  

Jill believed that her baby will be a boy because her psychic told her so. Jack think it's ridiculous that she believes in someone that does not have the credibility in his eyes to make such an assumption. So just because Jill believes in her psychic, it doesn't mean other people will agree with it. This makes the claim a bad appeal to authority. 

Week 3 Post 1: Complex Argument for Analysis

Question #3:

Las Vegas has too many people. There's not enough water in the desert to support more than a million people. And the infrastructure of the city can't handle more than a million: The streets are overcrowded, and traffic is always congested; the schools are overcrowded, and new ones can't be built fast enough. We should stop migration to the city by tough zoning laws in the city and county.

1. Las Vegas has too many people.
2. There's not enough water in the desert to support more than a million people.
3. The infrastructure of the city can't handle more than a million
4. The streets are overcrowded,
5. Traffic is always congested;
6. The schools are overcrowded,
7. And new ones can't be build fast enough.
8. We should stop migration to the city by tough zoning laws in the city and county.

Argument? Yes this is an argument.

Conclusion: We should stop migration to the city by tough zoning laws in the city and county.

Additional premises needed? All the premises supports the conclusion but it is possible to add details and facts to support each premises.

Identify any subargument: 2,3,4,5,6 and 7 are independent and support the conclusion.

All in all the argument was good but the argument could have been stronger if the author wrote more details to support each premises. This exercise was helpful because it helped me break down how to analyze an argument step by step. Now I understand how to analyze an argument better.

Week 2 Post 3: Chapter 3 Concept

One of the concept that I was interested in was the reading about the different types of leadership. There were four different types of leadership that were discussed in the book. The four different types of leadership are authoritarian, consultative, participative, and laissez-faire. An authoritarian leadership is when the leader of a group makes a decision without consulting with the rest of the group. A consultative leadership is when the leader actually listens to what the group had to say before making the final decision. A participative leadership is when the leader shares their decision making with the whole group. The goal is achieved with everyone's thoughts in mind as a whole. In this leadership, everyone participate and is considered to be a leader. The last leadership the book discussed about was the laissez-faire leadership. In this leadership everyone agrees and just go with the flow.  Leadership plays an important role in everyday life. It is a key essential to survive in this society.

2). Discuss Strong versus Valid Arguments in detail. Give an example of each from everyday life.

For an argument to be valid the premises has to be false with no possible way for it to be true and at the same time the conclusion has to be false as well. For an argument to be strong, the premises has to be true but the conclusion can be false.

Valid Argument Example:
Mari is a girl. All girls wear dresses to school dances. So Mari wore a dress. This is a valid argument because Mari is a girl and she did wear a dress. The first and third premises is true but the second premises is false because not all girls wear dresses to the dance or even in general.

Strong Argument Example:
Every animal that have wings can fly. Therefore, chickens can fly because they have wings. This is a strong argument because not all animals with wings can fly. So the conclusion can be false.

W3: D1 bad Argument

There are three tests that are used to consider if an argument is a good argument or a bad one, according to the Epstein text. The premises are plausible, the premises are more plausible than the conclusion, and whether the argument is valid or strong.

One should speak the language that their ancestors spoke. Mark's parents speak Spanish. Therefore, he should be able to speak Spanish.

It is possible that Mark is not able to speak Spanish. Just because his parents can speak Spanish, it does not mean that he can. The conclusion may be true but it is a bad argument, because the first premise is false. It is false because his parents may not have taught him or even wanted him to learn language to begin with. Everyone has their own way of raising their son and or daughter. We don't know his background and if anything he may be disabled, in which he could be mute or deaf. There are many factors that can prevent Mark from speaking Spanish.

Week 1- Post 3 Chapter 2 Concept

The concept that really caught my attention was in the Epstein text "What Are We Arguing About?" It really caught my attention because arguments are formed from simple communication issues. We all know that everyone has their own way of speaking and communicating with others. Everyone thinks differently so some people may interpret others in a different way. The different level of communication with others may cause stress and annoyance to oneself because it's hard to fully understand someone else's thought. Subjective claims, objective claims, the use of being ambiguous and vague, and even defining something is discussed in this chapter. Many people including me, confuses subjective and objective claims. Arguments are stirred up when one can't understand another, especially since everyone has their own opinion. Being vague and ambiguous occurs in one's everyday life. The lack of the knowledge of many vocabulary also is a huge factor in the frustration of communication.  We need to strive to understand these concepts that causes us miscommunicate with one another more so arguments won't form.

Week 1 Post 2: Vague and Ambiguous

Vague sentences are not clear and definite in thought. They aren't fully expressed and or understood. In this case only the speaker would fully understand and know what he/she is saying while leaving the listener out of the loop. Earlier this week my friend met a guy and I asked her to tell me about him and all she said was "He was a strange-looking guy." That description of him was so vague because I didn't get to know anything about him and it wasn't detailed enough. "Strange-looking" can be anything depending on how a person view things. I could think that "strange-looking" may be that his hair line is receiving and my friend could of thought that he had bad posture. She should have gave more description about the guy and I would like there too be more information from her response.

Ambiguous sentences are sentences that can interpret into two different meaning. My Comm20 teacher once told me "Woman without her man is nothing," but it can mean two different things depending on how you say it and even by using punctuation. It could mean "Woman, without her man, is nothing," or "Woman, without her man, is nothing."

Week 1 Post 1: Subjective and Objective Claims

Subjective and objective claims can be confusing because they are both statements that can be true or false. Subjective claims are statements or expressions that invokes personal opinions or feelings. A subjective claim cannot be proved right or wrong by any accepted criteria.
Here are a few examples of how I have used subjective claims:
-Touching a cockroach is scary.
-Fried chicken is better than grilled chicken.
Although we all know that bugs can be touched and many people people eat chicken, all these claims cannot be proven true or false because everyone has their own opinion and feelings towards a claim. Here are some counter-claims to my statements that can be easily made:
-Grilled chicken is tastier than fried chicken.
-It's interesting to touch a cockroach.
Not everyone likes fried chicken or think cockroach are scary because everyone has their own perspective in life. 
Objective claims is different from subjective claims because they are actual facts that can be proven either true or false.

Now that I actually know what a subjective claim and an objective claim is, I realize that I use them a lot and daily. An example that I have used of objective claim would be that Forever 21 is having a dress sale of $10 each. This is an objective claim because it's not my opinion but is based on the store's advertisement.

Introductory Post

Hello everyone,

I'm 19 years young and I'm a 2nd year student here at SJSU. As of now I'm undeclared. I currently hold the position of Historian in my sorority so I love to take pictures and create scrapbooks. On my down time I like to do arts and craft, hang out, laugh, dance, go shopping, watch movies, create many memories, and go on adventures.