Procrastination, the Global Pandemic - Blog Post 6

Arguments in Music

   

         Argumentation is generally thought of as occurring conversationally; however, we all often make arguments and protests in many other ways such as protesting with a sign or with our bodies. Perhaps one of the most impacting ways that people argue and make points is through music. For centuries, music has been a method of expression for people. Consider Billie Holiday's haunting song "Strange Fruit", addressing racism and the violence that erupts from it, or the song from the video above by Phil Collins, "Another Day in Paradise", which deals with poverty and the ignorance we all engage in on a daily basis about it. Through music, these artists strive to move people to action, to convince people that there is indeed a problem that needs to be addressed. Often times, arguments in music are much more effective, memorable, or emotional than a traditional conversational argument because the music adds an extremely moving quality to the logic presented within the lyrics.  

Be Happy. Be Healthy.

http://www.moneysavingmadness.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/honey-nut-cheerios.jpg

WATCH: https://youtu.be/ehi7XT_Avbc

My roommate was eating Cheerios this morning, and she grabbed the box and said their famous line, "Be Happy. Be Healthy". Upon hearing that, I realized that General Mills was making a claim with their beloved cereal. They were arguing that, by eating their cereal, the consumer could be happy and healthy, as evident by their many commercials with that line. Similarly, on their box, they also claim that their cereal can help to lower cholesterol because of the soluble fiber it contains. Are these claims true? I suppose you'll have to eat them to find out.

Strawman Fallacy

http://www.examiner.com/images/blog/EXID13237/images/Strawman(1).jpg

This cartoon is an example of the Strawman fallacy because it seems to be providing evidence against creationists. However, upon further inspection, it becomes clear that the arguments made are not always true, rather, they are hasty generalizations that seek to draw attention away from the real arguments. They are weak distractions. Similarly, the cartoon also contains the ad hominem fallacy as it attacks creationists as being brainless.

Bandwagon in Argumentation

http://budriscc2.weebly.com/uploads/1/8/4/6/18469126/9110321_orig.jpeg

This is an example of the fallacy of bandwagon in argumentation. It demonstrates the fallacy because it plays on how many iOS devices have been shipped, highlighting their success and using that to point out to others that, they too, should join the 120 million and get an iOS device. 

Killer Smoking Ads - Blog Post 5

https://sites.google.com/a/westcta.ccsd.net/drug-awareness-panels/anti-smoking-ad-panel-one


http://webneel.com/daily/sites/default/files/images/daily/03-2013/28-creative-anti-smoking-ad.jpg

             Smoking has been a huge issue for decades. With each passing year, the dangers of tobacco and nicotine continue to multiply, and yet, it continues to be a common habit among all ages. As a result, organizations that seek to educate people and raise awareness of the dangers of this habit are always putting out new ads to extinguish the desire in people to smoke. However, questions surround their ad choices which are often shocking, to say the least. Both these ads effectively portray their respective messages.

            The first one, using the image of a corpse with a toe tag on it colored similarly to a Marlboro cigarette pack, enhances its text which notes that number of people who die from smoke-related diseases and how many began as teen smokers. That particular ads suggested that tobacco consumption leads to diseases that can cause death and is directed towards both smokers and non-smokers because it is meant to encourage either party to take action whether that action be quitting or never starting the habit. However, it seems to especially speak to the smoker who uses Marlboro by connecting the brand to the corpse, literally. This ad, while disconcerting, does not seem to suggest anything unreasonable or harmful for smoking has been proven to contribute to many different diseases such as heart disease, cancer, and other respiratory issues.

             The second ad is much more disturbing because it raises the issue of second hand smoke and its affect on children. Children always make an argument more personal and emotional because no one likes to see an innocent child harmed in any way. The Chilean Corporation Against Cancer uses this to their advantage by suggesting that smoking is "not only suicide. It's murder". This strikes deeply in the heart of nonsmokers and smokers alike. The issue raised by this ad is indeed a legitimate one. I, personally, know people who, as adults, suffer from the effects of their parents' smoking habits. Though their method is shocking and disturbing, their point is valid.

             Smoking is a sensitive issue. Despite all of the studies and knowledge surround it, many people still smoke. Often times, it is because they are addicted to the chemicals, enjoy the stress relieving aspect of smoking, or simply do not want to quit. However, perhaps the most disturbing reason is the complete ignorance many youth smokers embrace regarding smoking. Many do not understand the long-lasting consequences of the habit and simply what to "try it out", not realizing that they would get hooked very quickly. According to an article in the New York Times entitled "Why Smokers Still Smoke", the problem is as simply as a lack of self-control (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/28/opinion/sunday/why-smokers-still-smoke.html?_r=0). 

               Research suggests, however, that perhaps the most influential reasons that people quit smoking are because of their health and their family. Knowing this, it seems that the best way to encourage people to stop is to emphasize the dangers to health and to family which is the approach many anti-smoking organizations are utilizing. However, efforts clearly need to be increased in order to dissuade people from smoking. Also, greater access to the necessary steps to quit should be emphasized as well. People need to be educated, but, ultimately, they will make their own decisions. That is, indeed, the sad reality.

           

the Either-or Fallacy

http://www.buzzle.com/img/articleImages/611023-11626-42.jpg

We have all experienced the traditional faulty argument that, "We can either do this or we have to do that". I, for one, often feel very defeated by so few choices. Rarely do I respond with something such as "Those are not the only two options in the world". As demonstrated by the cartoon, the either-or fallacy often assumes one solution or another without examining or admitting the possibility of something else. It is extremely ineffective in argumentation and can lead to the appearance of ignorance on the part of the arguer.

Scapegoats in Hollywood

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/shooter/

             The use of a scapegoat in Hollywood is almost as common as scapegoating in argumentation. A film that demonstrates the use of a scapegoat is Shooter.  In the film, Swagger, played by Mark Wahlberg, is set up to take the fall for an assassination. A scapegoat is placing blame or causation on an easy target without proof. Wahlberg's character exemplifies this when he, believing that he is helping his government, is actually being set up and accused of assassinating a foreign dignitary. Often times, when scapegoating, the accused party cannot defend itself, similarly to Wahlberg in the movie who is forced to run and use any means necessary to defend himself. Just as Wahlberg is accused of something he did not do, in argumentation, many are prone to place blame where it does not belong rather than dealing with the issue or argument at hand. It is a distraction and will not lead to a solution or effective argumentation.

Clever Ad

http://itcolossal.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Outstanding-Advertisements-00.jpg

This is a clever ad by Volkswagen about their precision parking. The argument presented by their ad is that their park assist is accurate and effective in any situation- no matter how precarious- as demonstrated by the porcupine's dangerous needles so close to the thin plastic bags that house the goldfish. It is simple yet effective.

Red Herrings in Argumentation

http://chquotes.synthasite.com/resources/ch_context.gif

This comic strip is an example of a red herring, a fallacy in argumentation that distracts from the actual issue. This comic demonstrates that when Calvin distracts his dad from his disobedience by saying that it could be much worse. While context is important, Calvin's argument is invalid as it attempts to set aside the heart of the issue-his disobeying his dad.

On the Flip Side: Perspective and Argumentation

https://paulmarsic.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/bikini-vs-burqa.jpg

          Arguments are all about perspective. We argue as a result of our opinions, our experiences, our beliefs which culminate into our perspective. This comic epitomizes the importance of perspective in argumentation. If we do not seek to understand others' perspectives, our arguments will be based on misinformation and assumptions. To the woman in the bikini, she sees her dress as her freedom and the burka as a societal hindrance of that freedom; however, on the flip side, the woman in the burka wears it our of respect for her family and herself but perceives the scantily clad woman to be yield to societal pressures to display her body for all to stare. Neither woman recognizes the perspective of the other nor do they acknowledge each other's perspectives and their legitimaticies. As a result, they will not approach an argument with each other with respect, seeking to understand. Instead, they appear to be judgmental about the other's situation and see the other as the one in need of help. This is not conducive to healthy argumentation about their cultures and practices. It is critical in argumentation to seek to understand and always look on the flip side in order to come together to find a solution and to understand.

the Paper Clip: Blog Post 4

Start with a paper clip and see what you can get for it. Continue to trade as many times as you can, making an argument for why people should trade with you. What did you say to persuade people to make these trades? 

http://www.bloomberg.com/ss/06/07/redpaperclip/source/2.htm

         Trading is a integral part of history. We trade stories. We trade services. We trade commodities, and often, we trade lies. Salesmanship is a tough but legitimate job at which many are incredibly successful. Trade and salesmanship both had an element of persuasion. Without the power to persuade, appeals to trade of sell an item will often fall on deaf ears. It is the individual with the power to persuade the trade partner that they need or want this item desperately in order to facilitate a trade or sale.

         This held true for the assignment that prompted this blog post. Starting with a paper clip, I worked my way up to see what I could get. I felt in the situation with my roommate that the most effective form of persuasion was to tell her that this was for an assignment in school. Because we are close friends, she wanted to help which made her more willing to sit and listen/trade with me. Initially, she gave me tape in exchange for the paper clip. Then she gave me a pen for the tape. After that, she offered a quarter for the pen and a piece of gum for the quarter. However, when it came to trading for the gum, she said "I would just take it" because gum is not particularly valuable to her or to me. The times that she was most open to trading was when she considered a situation in which she would be in a particular need for the item I offered. This is key to persuasion when it comes to trading and selling items. The buyer must truly believe they need the item or desperately want the item in order to give something in exchange for it. Whatever they give will be of lesser value to them than the thing they are getting.    

Respect in Argumentation

http://quotesgram.com/jackie-robinson-quotes/

                      A vital part of argumentation is mutual respect. Without it, there are no boundaries to hold back the violent waves of irrational, name-calling, illogical, and down-right rude tactics that so often plague modern debates. In an age plagued by heightened emotions, political correctness, and a lack of logical thought when debating, respect is sorely lacking and desperately needed to revive the near-dead art of argumentation. When exercised properly, argumentation is a fantastic tool to share opinions, challenge perspectives, analyze thoughts, and exercise each other's brains. It is vital to discovering new ways of thinking, improving answers, and sharpening skills and plans. However, when argumentation is abused, it becomes nothing more than name-calling and a battle won by whomever is most insulting. A pathetic abused of such a difficult art indeed.
                      Many believe that respect in argumentation means one must respect the opposing position. However, such is not the case. As Mr. Robinson wisely points out, respect is not about liking a person or the position on which they stand. No, rather, it is respecting them as an individual and respecting their right to their own opinion. Freedom of thought is a wonderful thing, and freedom to express such thoughts is equally as precious and infinitely more rare. It should be treated with great value for not all are able to enjoy such abilities to openly discuss their opinions. It is for this reason that respect in such discussions is so important for we are all valuable human being, and, while not all ideas are created equal, those who express them deserve the proper treatment to express them. Each individual must be able to decide for themselves what is right, wrong, logical, or nonsensical, and no individual should be afraid to share their thoughts. How shall we learn from a diverse pool of ideals if we do not share with one another our opinions? Furthermore, how will we be able to fish from said pool of thought if we keep others from contributing their ideas because they are inferior? To do so will certainly lead to a sorely depleted idea pool.
                    As Mr. Robinson alluded to in his quote, one does not have to respect the ideology in an argument; however, he must respect the right of the one who has it to hold such a view. It is in failing to show such respect that arguments will no longer be productive; rather, they will become shouting matches and a battle of insults. When this begins to happen in a society, that is when freedom will slowly begin to fade behind a guise of superior intellect and divided perspectives which are forced upon a society by whichever group is more powerful at the time.