week 4 question 3

The part I found most interesting in this weeks reading was the discussion about how organizational communication works. I really enjoyed the hierarchy diagrams of company showing all the various “formal” channels of communication in companies. I found these diagrams to be very helpful when thinking about jobs, as it is not something that a company would give an employee. I also liked when they discussed “informal” channels of communication. This would be referring to rumors and “grapevine/water-cooler” talk about things going on in the system. I have been experiencing this at my workplace (government office) all week and this explanation helped me understand how this happens and how confidential information is “leaked” by higher ranking employees long before it I made official. I really liked that they discuss how to become more visible in the workplace and I felt these tips to be very personal and not “textbook-like”. The tips they give near the bottom of page 63 are excellent workplace networking tips that I will carry on to my future jobs.

week 4 question 2

The fallacy I chose to explain more in depth is the fallacy of “appealing to emotion”. Essentially this means that someone is trying to unfairly associate an action or belief with a certain feeling. I say unfair because these are typically decisions one must decide on their own. I believe that this is one of the most common types of fallacies, because although we do not think of it, it is implied on the commercials we see everyday. Buy “Product” because it will make you fell this way. Because that method of fallacy can be seen in tons of ads everyday, my “real world” example will a different use of “appeal to emotion”

The other day I was shopping in downtown San Francisco. I live in San Jose for school, but my family lives in the suburbs outside of San Francisco, so I spend time there occasionally. It was the day before valentines day, and I noticed something strange. While there are usually panhandlers there, there was at least 4 times more this day. While thinking about their methods from a communication standpoint, I noticed that they used this fallacy They try to associate certain emotions with the action of giving them money (or time when signing a petition). They use clever wording to either imply that you will feel good if you give them money, or make you feel like a greedy, heartless person if you do not and walk away. While the various premises may be different, the end conclusion is usually to give them money. While their situation is certainly sad, and it would be difficult to give money to every one people who panhandle use this (plus many more) communication method(s).

week 4, question 1

Here is example #3 from page 225 analyzed

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 million.

4. The streets are crowded

5. Traffic is always congested

6. The schools are overcrowded, and new ones can't be built fast enough

7. We should stop migration by tough zoning laws in the city and county.

Argument: Yes, this is an argument.

Conclusion: The conclusion is statement #7, that we should stop migration (to Las Vegas) by tough zoning laws to the city and county.

Additional premise needed? I think no additional premise are needed. I think the writer should have added “therefore” to the beginning of the conclusion, and maybe added some statistics to claims #2,3,4,5, & 6 to add validity to them. Statement #1 sets up the argument Statements #2-6 are claims supporting that, and statement 7 is the conclusion.

Identify and sub-argument: Although it is not blatantly stated, I think statements 2-6 can all stand on their own as separate arguments under the main one. For example, I can see “There is not enough water in the city to support more than a million” being made into its own argument, with separate claims supporting that.

Good argument?: I do not think that this is a good argument, although it is decent. I think that the writer left out the fact that a lot of the traffic and street congestion has to due to tourism, and zoning laws would not help that. Statements #2 and #3 are excellent statements that can support their claim, but I feel that they all need statistics to back them up.

I feel like doing these kind of exercises help us learn. I think that dissecting something complex and hard to understand down into smaller parts can help us comprehend it. I feel that I have a better understanding of the exercise after doing this assignment than I did before.

week 2 question 3

I chose to write about the concert of shared leadership from the group communication textbook. I believe that this is a very important aspect of group communication. In classes, when we form groups usually one person comes out as the leader. That person is usually in charge of keeping everyone on task, communicating with the professor, and organizing the completed work, but certainly they cant do everything. What is special about shared leadership is that multiple people take control in the group, usually related to what they are good at. Leaders always have their strengths and weaknesses, but with shared leadership, people can take control over what they excel at, while others take over aspects that they themselves excel at. This is why companies have managers and supervisors. These people are sometimes qualified to lead the company/organization, ect as a whole, but instead they manage a smaller unit that they are more/most familiar with. In college groups, this is especially important. It gives everyone the opportunity to lead in a way that they are comfortable with. It takes away the traditional idea of “one person is a leader and everyone else is a follower” and replaces it with the idea that everyone should have some power and responsibly.

Week 2 question 2

There is a big difference between strong arguments and valid
arguments. It is possible for an argument to be valid but not strong

In a valid argument, there is no way for the premise to be true and
the conclusion false. If “X” is met, then “Y” is true, and most valid
statements follow that outline. An example from my daily live occurred
the other day happened at a dog park. My friend claimed that “all dogs
like treats. Your golden retriever is a dog. Therefore, she likes
treats”. While the argument is valid, it lacks strength. Valid, yet
weak arguments tend to overlook all exceptions to the scenario,
assuming that the premise is the reason for the conclusion. My dog
could eat them for medical reasons, or simply dislike them but still
eat them just because they are there. By coming up with reason after
reason that the conclusion of any argument does not relate to the
premise, we prove the arguments weakness.


Strength adds to an argument. My previous argument was valid, but
lacked strength due to the multiple possibilities leading to the
conclusion other than the premise. An example of a strong example
from daily life would be from a grocery store trip I took. I have
tried almost all varieties of Ketchup. I have never had a type of
Ketchup I did not enjoy. Therefore, I like all kinds of ketchup. This
argument is not valid, but it is strong. The premise is true, and the
fact about trying “almost all” varieties of Ketchup helps strengthen
it, but it is not perfect. While my claim is almost positively true,
there still can be an exception. The fewer exceptions that can be
found, the stronger it is.

Comm week 2 question 1

According to Epstien, there are 3 tests that an argument must go through to be good. An argument can pass certain tests but fail the others. They are independent of the others.

My argument for this assignment is that: I am enrolled in Math 123 at San Jose State University. Only students who receive a 90% or above on the math test receive an A. I received a 93% on the math test. Therefore, I received an A plus on my test.

First of all, my argument passes the first test. The premise for my arguments are certainly plausible. It is believable that I am a student at San Jose State University. It is also plausible that the teacher would have those grading guidelines.

Secondly, another requirement for the argument to be good is that the premise has to be more plausible than the conclusion. In this argument, the premise is certainly more plausible than the conclusion. It is not possible for the premise to be true and the conclusion false. There really could have been no other way to reach the conclusion without going through the premise.

Thirdly, the last test for an argument to be good is that the argument is valid and strong. My argument, in this case is certainly valid and strong. The premise is plausible, and the argument is strong because there is no plausible way that I could have achieved an A on the test without scoring a 90%. Assuming everything is say is true, it is a very strong argument.

week of 1/31 question #3

A concept from the group communication book that I found interesting is the idea “What makes a good group?”. As college students, most of us have been involved in dozens of groups in high school, and have been a part of good groups and bad groups. The book lists a few characteristics that make a good group. One of these is cohesion. Group cohesion is the ability to stay together “in the face of opposition”. I feel that this is important for groups to have. Groups always have a variety of tasks to complete, and they are rarely ever balanced in difficulty and time required to complete. For example, last semester I was in a group that had quite a few tasks to do. Most groups members took the easiest ones, while the tougher ones were ignored or were postponed to be discussed at a later meeting. After a couple weeks of this, we had all the tough tasks left, with a small amount of time to complete them. Group cohesion prevents this by having members step up to the challenge for the benefit of the group, and as a result the group will complete the entire assignment in a more organized and timely manner.

With that said, I can't wait for this new group paper! My group and I are starting tomorrow!

week of 1/31 Question 2

A vague sentence is one that has no clear meaning. A recent example in my life would be the other day, when I was asked to file “those papers” in the government office where I work. Because there are many papers to be filed in many different places, there is no clear meaning about what it is that I should do. Because of the lack of direct meaning in my boss's instructions, this statement is very vague.

A ambiguous statement, on the other hand is slightly different. Unlike a vague statement, where the lack of specificity leads to the possibility of multiple meanings, an ambiguous statement has no clear meaning usually do to the unusual placement of words. An example from my life occurred the other day, when my mother asked me, while putting away Christmas decorations, to “Put the ornament in the box in the garage. This could mean I am supposed to be putting away an ornament inside a box that happens to located in the garage, or it could mean that the ornament I am looking for is already in a box, and that box then goes into the garage.

Although both types are slightly different, both usually just need to be slightly rewritten to make more sense.

Week of 1/31 Question #1

Objective claims:

An objective claim is a statement that can be proven true or false. It may not be true, but it concerns a factual topic, and its authenticity can be proven through research. An example of a recent objective statement I have heard was made by a friend. Yesterday, I asked my roommate how many apples we had left in the refrigerator. She replied, “We currently have 9 apples in the refrigerator”. Her statement would be considered an objective statement, as I can look into the refrigerator and see if her statement is true or false. Although her statement was indeed true, had it been false, it still would be considered an objective statement.

Subjective Claims:

A subjective claim, on the other hand, is is more concerned with personal opinion than actual fact. Subjective statements cannot be proven true/false by research. An example of a recent subjective claim I have heard was when my friend and I were at a small diner when he proclaimed “Onion rings taste amazing Patrick!”. The claim might have true according to some, but according to me, it was not true. There was no way we could have came to a definitive conclusion about the validity of the statement, as the result differs from person to person, hence it is a subjective claim.