Week of September 24-30 Discussion #3

  I thought the most interesting concept in Chapter 2 was the “Dreams and Problem Solving” section. This section brought up a good point about reasoning is possible through dreams. We often believe that reasoning is a conscious activity, but in this section it says that cognitive scientists are discovering that much of reasoning is unconscious and automatic. I thought that was very interesting because that is something I didn’t know. Research has showed that “brain function has suggested that dreaming may also be involved with cerebral activity related to reason and problem solving”. When dreaming, our brains have the ability to solve problems that is present in our conscious world. There was an example on this section about a student had problems in her relationship and had a dream that she was driving a long boardlike scooter. Whenever she passed people who asked her for a ride, she let them get on the board until it became difficult for her to balance and end up falling over. When she analyzed the dream, she came to the conclusion that she would put others needs before hers and that is why she having problems with her relationships. In the end she planned and added to her goals: “Learn how to balance my needs and others”.

Week of September 24-30 Discussion #2

  Dawkins thinks that evolution and a belief in God is not compatible. He brings upon Thomas Aquinas’ “Proofs” and says that it doesn’t prove anything. He thinks that Aquinas’ arguments about a God existing are unsound. As he goes down to each “Proof” he has arguments stating, if not almost mocking, that God is just an illusion. It seems like in his counter argument he’s saying there is no logical that helps show evidence that there is a God that created all things. He brings up that Charles Darwin’s theory pretty much destroys any sign or existence of God because the theory says that Evolution is by natural selection of design and not by a God. If Aquinas were alive today, he would respond to Dawkins position as ignorance. Being a strong believer of God, a Catholic, and a philosopher, I think he would have explained it the same way as he did on his excerpt. He would reason the way he did, and maybe even more. He would stand firmly about his beliefs and maybe even try to reason with Dawkins and change his views about God.

Week of September 24-30 Discussion #1

I believe that the type of reasoning I’m strongest in is Traditional Views of Reason. Just like in Chapter 2, I think that my reasoning revolves around Traditional Views of Reason and that’s what built me as a person. All these examples that were discussed in Chapter 2 are actually reasons that I believe and follow most in my life. Plato’s teachings and Christianity are some examples of what created my foundation in reasoning. Although I believe I have other strengths in different type of reasoning, Traditional Views is my strongest. 

In Chapter 2, there was a situation example about completing a life plan and concluding that a person is in an entirely wrong field of study. I thought this was a great example to use because this has happened to me recently. After 3 years attending SJSU, I've been in the Software Engineering Major. Throughout the years I've been planning out everything carefully and thought I would be fine as life goes on. Then right around my third year, I began to question myself about being in this field. Will I enjoy countless hours working with math on the computer? After that question I was able to change my intended major into Graphic Design even if means another 3 years here instead of forty years of misery in a field I don’t want to do. This shows that my reasoning helped choose the right career choice after some rework on my life plans and looking ahead.

Week 4 Discussion #3

One of the concepts in this reading this week that I found interesting and thought that was important was in Chapter 4 in The Essential Guide to Group Communication was the Master Communication Technology section . I thought this was important because technology has advanced rapidly and many organizations have moved in with technology. The more technology changes the more challenging it will be to communicate with others especially those who are not “tech-savvy”. In this section it explained many ways how to communicate with technology especially with telephones, teleconferencing, using email and the Internet. This section gave some etiquette on proper ways to communicate through those ways of communications. I thought this was also important because organizations do use this ways of communications and knowing how to communicate with others this way is essential. Technology has gone a long way and many people are using it now more often, especially with communicating. One must know how to use this technology to properly communicate with others and especially in organizations who use such technology.

Week 4 Discussion #2

Dr. Novello used cause-and-effect inductive reasoning in seeking a solution to the problem of smoking among children by addressing the sudden increase of youth smoking ever since the ads brands of cigarettes were first introduced. And with that said, she went out and banned those ads that targeted the youth. With Dr. Novello bringing up this issue, it showed her cause-and-effect inductive reasoning. She was able to state the issue to the public and explained that brought up the effect of that issue. When the ads showed up, the smoking in youth had increased. With the issue stated, she then brought it to the public to ban such cigarette ads that targeted youth. This is a good cause-and-effect inductive reasoning because she stated the cause of cigarettes being advertised to the youth and in effect there was a sudden increase in youth smoking during 1988 when Joe Camel ads for Camel cigarettes were introduced. In the end she was able to help bring a solution to this problem of smoking among children and teens.

Week 4 Discussion #1

Just before the week started, I looked at my calendar to see if I had a busy week ahead of me and I did. I had more than 3 subjects worth of homework to do by the end of the week and also realized a few midterms were coming up. I asked myself how I would spend my time to get things done. I had many probabilities going through my head. I wanted to all the homework I thought that was necessary for my midterms next week as a study guide and finish the rest over the weekend. I was going to do all my homework on one day either Friday, Saturday, Monday until I realized that I have been doing this for quite some time and most of the time it doesn’t work for me. I should probably space out my homework, so that I can actually learn the material instead of doing it all at once. This is an inductive argument because I had a premise where I realized that my action won’t work out in the end. In this case I drew a conclusion about my time management that I would probably be better off spacing out my homework throughout the week.

Week 3 Discussion #3

One of the concepts from the reading this week that I found interest in was in “Chapter 3 in the Group Communication text - Leadership and Decision Making in Groups and Teams”. I thought this was a very important concept because in group/teams, leadership is essential to a successful group/team. The chapter went into detail about what is leadership, the types of leadership, and what the leader should accomplish with the group during their time together. I really was interested in the different types of leadership which included: authoritarian, consultative, participative, and laissez-faire. I enjoyed how the book included how each one had a checklist on how each have certain characteristics. It seemed as though, as a leader, one must choose which type they would want to be. Although each one has its advantages, it also comes with disadvantages. In the book, it showed every characteristic each type had. Every single one had its good and bad and it seemed like being a leader, one must balance out each type to be successful, mainly the authoritarian, consultative, and participative type. The one type leaders should stay away from is the laissez-faire, for it is the least effective for a successful group/team.

Week 3 Discussion #2

I believe that this scriptural passage doesn’t EXACTLY prohibit the usage of the death penalty. The Death Penalty is something that we humans created. It wasn’t Jesus who directly said “Death Penalty is to be prohibited”. But I do believe that he does want us not to kill one another just “to return hate for hate and evil for evil”. I strongly believe in those teachings and believe that we should not use the death penalty to punish others because of their heinous acts. I strongly agree with Sister Helen Prejean that the death penalty is indeed complete violation of the human dignity and it’s also a violation to the teaching of the scriptures from Jesus of Nazerth himself. Jesus did not directly say that the death penalty should be prohibited, but he was saying that we should not kill one another just because of certain acts.

If people identify themselves as Christians, then they follow the scriptures. If they follow the scriptures, then they don’t support the death penalty. Therefore if people identify themselves as Christians, they don’t support the death penalty.

Week 3 Discussion #1

I believe Holmes is trying to say that when people are trying to reason with something, they always depend on their own views and assume why something is in its current situation with facts that may not be even true. People always assume something and stick with it, when in reality it’s a false assumption. They believe that their opinion is right and that is the conclusion for the reason. I believe Holmes is trying state that it’s hard for people to actually see outside of their opinion because they believe they are right. They have a hard time trying to dictate other possibilities just because they already know what the conclusion is through their own observations and possible rumors.

For example, I too have had this kind of experience where I thought my parents were coming home late because of traffic. Usually everyday they come home late because I know there is traffic all the time during rush hour at about 6:00PM on highway 680. I always assumed that when they are late, that means they were in traffic. It only takes one hour to get home from work from where we live, so why else would they be late. This is a good example of people using unsupported assumptions because in the end, my parents actually worked overtime. Therefore they were stuck in traffic. Also before that, they stayed over at my grandparents’ house to rest before heading back home, thus resulting for them coming home late.

Week 2 Discussion #3

In chapter 6, Think by Boss, there was a section for propositions which was defined as a statement that expresses a complete thought. I thought this was a very good section to know because this is the door to an argument. Without this door there is not point to an argument. Propositions are claims you would want in an argument because it is the start of one. With solid propositions one can go far with their argument. It would be possible for strong examples and a very good conclusion. Although there are many important parts in an argument I believe propositions are the most important. It is the opener, the door, the beginning for an argument and it is necessary for one to use if they want to win, persuade, or to prove of point. Without it, an argument may become a pointless argument. It can go nowhere and become something else in the end.

Week 2 Discussion #2

I never had any issues with friends or jobs where I needed to stand my ground on certain issues. But just like any teenager, I have come across some issues with my parents where I needed to stand my ground. I love my parents dearly but there was an issue I had with them about picking a Major for College. Just like what every parent wants, they want their child to succeed in college and graduate with a very strong major. I once had and engineering major until I found out that it wasn’t what I wanted in life, so I switched to Graphic Design. When my parents heard the news they were very displeased about my decision. Yes it was a late decision, but it was mine. I was pressured into getting into this field in my high school years and I just recently decided it wasn’t something I wanted. They argued with me that without an engineering major, I will not have the efficient income to survive in life. I was disappointed that they believed that because I know for a fact that Graphic Design can compete with the engineering income. I explained to them that Graphic Design can go as far as some engineering positions. I proposed many positions a graphic designer can have and argued with many examples to support my position. After all that, they accepted my decision. Although still a little uneasy they respect my decision and accept it. This was a good example of critical-thinking skills that helped me stood my ground and decisions. This was something I wanted for me and I was happy with it. I was able to use my critical-thinking skills using propositions, supporting them with great examples, and concluding that it was something I wanted.

Week 2 Discussion #1

President Obama’s position is inconsistent with the fact that he opposes legalizing same-sex marriage but supports civil unions and equal rights for same-sex couples. He is trying to be neutral because I believe he is doing so to be accepted by both sides and as a President of this nation, he needs to do that. I believe he is not trying to choose any side on this topic because it can greatly change people’s perspective of him whether he chooses to support or deny same-sex marriage, either way he will be called out for his decision on whether he legalizes same-sex marriage or not. As of right now, his position is very inconsistent but only because I believe he is doing so to stay neutral.

I think Obama might respond on a neutral standpoint to Nava and Dawidoff’s statement. He will respect their views on same-sex marriage but will respond neutrally to their argument because of the fact that this is a sensitive topic and he wants both sides of the nation’s heterosexual and homosexual to accept him.