Communication in Organizations

In Chapter 4 of the Group Communications text, the roles in an organization are analyzed and described in detail. This topic, for me, brings back memories of my days as an officer in my Police Explorer back in high school. Even though I did a darn good job as the Chairman of Social Communications, reading this section made me realize that I knew exactly what I was doing. In any organization, there is a pecking order, which is a set of people that work in a certain order, depending on rank. The only way an organization can be triumphant, is if the communication between the lower and superior ranks and there is a mutual understanding of the information transpired. For example, in my years as a Police Explorer, I had a tendency to always inquire about promotions and things, but in order for me to get the answer that I wanted (or any answer for that matter); I had to go through the chain of command. This process I always hated, because I had to wait for FOREVER to get the answer, and when the answer finally came, it was COMPLETELY different from what the Advisor (head-honcho) originally said. This is why it is so important for there to be good communication between the two branches because without it, an organization can self-destruct.

Structure of Arguments

This topic, I must say was by far the most difficult topic to understand for me. Please bear with me, if I am travelling down a different path. It took me a while to figure out what part went where, but I can definitely see that this exercise helped me break down arguments and pick out key claims, when I finally understood it.
For the exercises on the Structure of Arguments, I chose to analyze #3.
“Las Vegas has too many people. (1) There’s not enough water in the desert to support more than a million people. (2) And the infrastructure of the city can’t handle more than a million (3): The streets are overcrowded (4), and traffic is always congested (5); the schools are overcrowded (6), and new ones can’t be built fast enough (7). We should stop migration to the city by tough zoning laws in the city and county. (8)”
Argument: yes
Conclusion: We should stop migration to the city by tough zoning laws in the city and county.
Additional Premises Needed? a) If the city’s infrastructure can’t support 1 million people, then there isn’t enough water to support 1 million people. b) Vegas streets are overcrowded and traffic is always congested, schools are overcrowded and new ones aren’t readily available. Therefore Vegas has too many people and we should stop migration to the city by tough zoning laws in the city and county.
Identify any subarguments: 2, 4, 5, and 6 are all independent claims that support 1. Then 1 supports 8.

Content Fallacies

On page 201 of the text, Content Fallacies are the topic. I chose to describe the fallacy “Bad appeal to common belief (or practice)”. In my opinion an argument that is a bad appeal to common belief is one that falsely justifies a claim by generalizing the amount of it participants (if it worked for them, it can work for you). An example of this fallacy would be the Hydroxy Cut commercials, especially the newer one with Ronnie from ‘Jersey Shore’. In this commercial he says that by taking Hydroxy Cut he lost a tremendous amount of weight and got the sculpted body he always wanted. He finishes by adding, “if you want results like these you need to pick up your bottle of Hydroxy Cut today!” This argument can be considered a bad appeal to common belief because ironically, Ronnie is a TV personality and guys who aren’t so attractive would love to duplicate his physique. The viewers will believe since Ronnie obtained the body he has from Hydroxy Cut, them taking Hydroxy Cut will produce the same result.

What Interested Me in Chapter 3...

The main thing that interested me about this chapter is how an argument can be so complex and dense. Even in my POLS 20 Controversial Legal Issues course, I never had to dismantle any argument so deeply. The farthest I have gotten was vagueness and ambiguity.
When it came to learning that a premise must follow a conclusion, I started to get confused, but the more examples I read about it I started to understand. The book says that a conclusion must follow from the premise; this is another confusing way to say that the premise as well as the conclusion must be true, likely, or unlikely in order for the argument to be valid, strong or otherwise. I honestly feel that there should be a cliff notes version of this book, because there are some unintended contradictions in this text, differentiating valid from strong arguments which is really confusing.

Tests for a Good Argument

An argument is expressed as an attempt to assure someone that a certain claim is true. In order to classify an argument as "good", it must first pass three tests. The first two tests are to determine whether the premises are plausible, and are more plausible than the conclusion. A claim can only be plausible of there is reason to believe that is true; which leads to the latter test, determining whether the argument is valid or strong. An important note that the book tells us to remember, is that every good argument is valid however; arguments that are invalid can be classified from strong to weak, exposing the possibility of the likelihood or unlikelihood of the conclusion being false and the premises true at the same time.
For example:
Jen left her phone at her boyfriend Blue’s house. Blue went through Jen’s phone and found messages between her another man.
Messages:
Jen: Hey Max!
Max: Hey Jen, how r u?
J: Fine, u?
M: Same, wats ur favorite movie?
J: Crash, u?
M: Toy Story, hahahahaha
J: I like that movie 2, but not my fave.
M: Oh, ok
J: :)
Blue’s Argument (to Jen): I saw text messages between you and Max. You two were flirting about movies. So you are cheating.
The premises in Blue’s argument give us reason to believe there was indeed a conversation between Jen and Max and are also more plausible than the conclusion because the physical evidence makes his source reliable, thus passing the first two tests. The only problem is that his conclusion of Jen cheating is false, which doesn’t make the argument valid, just weak because the possibility of Jen cheating in those few messages is not so unlikely. The two could have been planning a movie date and begin their affair. “Imagine the possibilities”.

Strong vs. Valid Arguments

In chapter 3's reading, it was explained that valid arguments are only valid if the statement is presumed true as well as its conclusion. On the other hand, a strong argument is such that there is a reason to believe there is some truth to its premise, but falseness in its conclusion.
An example of a strong argument is:
All fruits have seeds.
So a cucumber is a fruit.
This is an example of a strong argument because the statement provided is a plausible claim; however, there is a possibility that this conclusion can be false because realistically not all fruits have seeds like bananas. An example of a valid argument is:
The government is facing a horrible budget crisis.
So they have to close schools and increase tuition fees to suffice.
The premise in this scenario is considered a plausible claim; the conclusion “follows from the premise”, as well as the conclusion being true. This deems this argument good and valid because it passes the 3 tests needed for a good argument.

Vague vs. Ambiguous

The term vague is frequently described as a sentence or phrase that is not thoroughly explained and often misunderstood. Earlier this semester, my laptop charger shorted out and I needed to replace it. I asked my room mate where I could find the nearest Best Buy. She told me, "There's one right off the freeway." I didn't know where she was directing me because there are several free ways like I-680, US-101 and I-280. Her di rections would be deemed vague because there is not just one Best Buy off of one freeway. An example of ambiguity is when my boss told me that he would "give me a ring tomorrow". I was sort of caught off guard because I didn't know what he meant by "a ring". I wasn't sure if he was refering to a physical ring or a phone call. Ambiguous language is language used during advertisements and sales pitches to get consumers to BUY! BUY! BUY! These phrases have a tendency to have open-ended meanings and can be interpreted in several ways.

Discussion #1

A subjective claim can be either true or false because it is not based on fact, but mainly based on personal. opinion; it can not be proven true or false in any way.Though an objective claim is quite similar to a subjective claim, an objective claim can be proven false or true by all means. Therefore an objective claim is not based on one’s own opinion but if that opinion could be proven or dis proven.
For example, my best friend Kare and I both own Toyotas; I own a '98 Camry and she, an '04 Corolla. I would always be extremely jealous when she would get gas and only use twenty-five dollars to put her gas tank on'F' as opposed to my fifty-two. I never understood why I'd always paid more than her. I went to the Toyota dealer for a routine oil change and come to find out, my engine is a whole lot bigger than Kare's which explained why my fill-up was so expensive. This costly experience is an example of an objective claim because the price of the fill-up was based on the size of the car's engine; a fact.
In contrast, an example of a subjective claim is when a former friend of mine decided to stay with the boy she is dating, and determined that he is the perfect guy for her, even though he has told her on several occasions that he is no longer interested in her. I am no expert on love, but I'm sure when someone tells they are no longer interested, they typically are no longer interested. I think he is a terrible human, but who am I to judge? Him being a terrible human is just an opinion of mine and cannot be proven as much as I wish it could.