Inductive Argument

An inductive argument is one in which the premises support the conclusion of the story, thus believing that the conclusion is not likely to be false.  The other day I had an inductive argument with myself right before I was about to be late for work.  I woke up hungover one morning and did not want to go to work.  But if I were to call in sick one more time at my work, I would most likely get fired.  Me being fired results in my income to be cut off therefore I can’t party anymore.  If I were to call in sick to work (premise),  it will result in me not having anymore income (premise), therefore I wont be able to party anymore (conclusion).  At this point my inductive argumentative skills convinced me to ignore the pain of waking up with a hangover, and to go to work so that I can party another day.

Silver Blaze

            In the story Silver Blaze, Sherlock Holmes states, “"when it comes to the art of reasoning, many people rely on opinion and unsupported assumptions" meaning that people often rely on their own uneducated assumptions which leads them to believe the wrong idea. Holmes uses this technique to find out who his criminals are by using deductive reasoning to eliminate all other suspects so he can find the actual criminal.  A lot of people often lead themselves to believing an idea based off of their own opinions and beliefs, and I can say I am one of those people sometimes.  When I was getting ready to pick what college I was going to, it was either between U of Arizona or Oregon State.  When I came back from my scouting trips, my dad told me I was going to SJSU or else he wasn’t paying for my college.  I was depressed for weeks and it was only time that taught me SJSU wasn’t as bad as I thought.  I’m getting my education done in SJSU’s prestigious Business program and I have met friends that I will hopefully know for the rest of my life.

The Death Penalty

The Death Penatly

           

There are many opinions about the death penalty, all which are influenced by religion, human morals, or just personal belief.  According to the Death Penalty Information Center, opinions that usually derive from religious background mainly are against the death penalty including Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam all of which have individual statements regarding the death penalty.  I believe that the death penalty should be abolished, but some crimes that involve inhumane wrong-doing’s may over turn my opinion on that particular crime.  In a typical crime for a death sentence, I feel that it is enough torture to make someone sit in a jail cell for the rest of there lives which gives them plenty of time to think about how they could be a free person if it wasn’t for one stupid decision.  In crimes that involve outrageous acts including mass murder, terrorism, and child murder are crimes that depending on the circumstances may change my mind.  To clarify I would only change my mind about reinstating the death penalty under these special circumstances, and let the rest play itself out.

Accepting Communication at face value

Accepting Communication at Face Value – To accept communication at face value is when one believes that information given by someone is valid due to having little time to complete an assignment or task.  Almost every time I am in a small group, I always find someone who tends to believe information at face value.  I believe that sometimes this happens because some people are too scared to say that they believe how valid their information is compared to how much the other person believes their information.   All communication messages must be questioned and analyzed in order for the group’s information to stay consistently valid. Effective group communicators should all be aware that the knowledge learned within the group is accurate due to everyone discussing and evaluating the information.   

Pg 169 Issues with friends or work

            I remember the day that one of my close family members told me that she was attracted to females and thought to consider herself as a lesbian.  At first I did not know how to respond to the idea, especially since she is my close family and I was also the first one in our entire family to find out about her situation.  As I thought more about her decision, I started to think less about it and more about her being my close relative.  So after realizing that all I want for my family is to be happy, I also realized that it was ignorance, which led me to feel unsure about her decision about being gay.  I now look past the fact that 2 of the same sex people are together and pay more attention to if they are happy with their lives and decisions.  A lot of my friends from back home joke around a lot about same sex people being together, and it never has bothered me at all until one of my good friends made a joke about my family member being gay, which I then immediately told my friend that I was bothered by the remark he made and asked him to keep my family out of it.  My friend tried to ease the tension by making another joke, which I then used my critical thinking skills to explain to him how being bothered by something like same sex marriage can show how ignorant someone could be.

"perspectives on same-sex marriage"

I believe that Obama’s decisions do not stay consistent with his beliefs, but as a Christian President of the United States, I think that he has handled the issue of same-sex marriage appropriately.  Obama believes that constitutionally, a man and a woman are to be lawfully wedded together, but at the same time he supports civil unions and equal rights for couples that are the same sex.  Although Obama stays supportive in civil union groups, as a President he opposes the amendment that federally supports same sex marriage.  I think that if he opposes same sex marriage on a federal level, he then is taking away the rights of gays and lesbians. I think that it would make more peace if an amendment passed allowing same sex marriage since that way the Constitution may stay valid in its point of providing all U.S. citizens with equal rights. I think Obama would agree with Navs’s and Dawidoff’s argument since gays and lesbians would not have the same rights as everyone else, therefore it wouldn’t be fair to those who agree with same sex marriage.