cause and effect

Reading through the cause and effect website was actually interesting and I have to say a little confusing at a few different parts.  I had never heard of arguing causation. I found this term to be fairly interesting and realize we use this type of arguing a lot, but I never knew that was the name of the argument.  The example that was used on the website made it a little easier to understand what the author was trying to justify. However the one area that caused a little confusion was when they were talking about post hoc reasoning and reverse causation. The idea of reverse causation made sense because it was simply the other version of arguing causation. However the idea of post hoc reasoning I am still a little unsure of how or what you would use it for.  But overall the website was fairly helpful, partly because I am in a business law class and the example used was relatable.

Judging Analogies

One area that I found to be interesting and helpful in chapter 12 was the judging analogies. Epstein mentions that in order to use an analogy is must be clearly stated, otherwise often times one side of the analogy can be too vague to use. I agree with this and often times find it hard to understand why somebody would use a specific analogy when trying to make their point or in order to prove someone wrong. I liked the first example that Epstein used, talking about Magic Johnson and HIV. At first the statement is hard to understand or follow and I would have to guess at why they decided to compare the military to an NBA star. However once they begin to explain the basis of the argument it makes sense and shows how you can use analogies but often times need to show the premises in order to people to completely understand what it is you are trying to tell them.

appeal to emotion

So I must say this is probably one of my favorite chapters because Epstein is able to state what needs to be said and move on. No more searching through words to find out what it is he is hoping to get across to students who read his books. I do love the appealing to emotion chapter because it lays out all of the different way that people encounter and use others emotions. I have already discussed the appeal to fear as being one of my least favorite because of how people use the fear in someone in order to get their support; I think it is way too twisted. However one appeal that I find interesting would be the feel good argument. I think this is something as college students that we often times feel is necessary or well deserved way of handling situations. However we all know how those conversations would most likely play out, no so well. However the idea that we use the appeal to feel good about ourselves is at least a positive way of making people see another side to an argument.  Trust me if the world worked this way, we would all be dumb and crazy because we weaseled out of situations that eventually benefitted us.

appealing to fear

In Chapter 10, I was shocked at how short it was, however though it was short it had a lot of information that was interesting and hopefully it will be beneficial as well. One idea that I found to be interesting was appealing to fear. I thought it was first interesting that Epstein mentioned that this was a common way for politicians and advertisers to manipulate the public people. From the example they used in the book I think that it is absolutely true. However I think the unstated conclusion is the worst part about it, simply because they feel if they can scare the public, then the public in turn will learn to trust them. I think this is the worst way of appealing to people. By using a person’s fear in order to get them to do something to benefit others is horrible. I am a person that has a lot of fears and therefore if someone tried to use them against me, I think that is a low way of trying to get someone to vote for you or trust you.