Concept

One concept I want to share with the class is “Negative Effects of emotion”. Although emotions do help us proceed to make better decisions, sometimes there are emotions that are based on negative stereotypes or anxieties rising from unresolved past experiences. These emotions that block our critical thinking, can lead to bad decisions or deny that there is a problem. For example, there are shows about couples cheating on them with someone else. By watching that show, people can suddenly fear that there significant other is cheating on them without having any evidence or proof that they are actually cheating. This fear can eventually lead to actions that they soon will regret. Feelings play a big part in decision making. Also, if there is a situation at work where you disagree with a customer, you can easily act angry towards them but you might get in trouble with your boss. Sometimes people let their emotions get ahead of themselves and don’t think before they act. 

Evolution and a belief in God

According to Dawkin, It seems that evolution and a belief in god is incompatible. Dawkin doesn’t agree with God being the “mover” or “cause” to how society has formed over time. He states that people try to put this idea together that god is the one who created everything but if that’s the case, then instead of the word “god”, they could have used the word “terminator” instead. Dawkin believes that the beginning of time should be called the “big bang”, not just a made up name called “god”. If Aquinas was alive today he would respond to Dawkins saying that Dawkins has no evidence either. All Dawkins is doing is denying the fact that Aquinas has a point and how people just made up an unknown human, which is God, and made him the creator of life. Aquinas can easily say how the bible was made and how it is still used today. Using his “Nothing moves without a prior mover” concept, Aquinas can say there had to be a creator for the bible and that person who created it was influenced by Jesus, the man who was sent by God.  

Reasoning

My types of reasoning are based on facts and what I’m best at doing. One of the best ways to reason is to understand the facts. For example, everyone knows the best thing to do is to get a college education and finish with a college degree. A common fact is getting a college degree will give you more opportunities and more job offers. Using this reasoning has pushed me closer to my goals and put me in a good standing with my career. By knowing the facts, I’m currently getting a college education and going to be working as an intern at a top firm in San Jose. My second reasoning is what I know I’m best at. A lot of people say “Do what you enjoy”, but I say “Do what you’re best at”, and that’s what I’m doing. I’m very good at numbers so I’m majoring in Business finance. By engaging in what I do best, I’m going use my strength and be the best in what I can do. As of now, I’m getting A’s in all my finance classes and taking advantage of my skill. 

Topic-Positive Correlation

One topic I want to discuss is “positive correlation”.  A positive correlation is if an incidence of one event increases when the second one increases. There are a lot of positive correlations that occur in the world and in our lives. For example, there is a positive correlation between the more cups of coffee you drink and the number of hours stayed awake. Another example would be the positive correlation between the more factories being built and the amount of carbon dioxide in the air. Another example of a positive correlation is the more companies opening up and the amount of job openings. A positive correlation doesn’t mean the situation has to be positive. For example, the more cigarettes smoked and the risk of lung cancer. So the more cigarettes smoked then the higher the risk of lung cancer. So, as long as the correlations between any two are increasing, then it is considered a positive correlation. 

Dr. Novello

Dr. Novello was a woman of dedication who worked her way up and became the U.S. Surgeon General. Dr. Novello’s main focus was to reduce the causes of the four public health problems: aids, violence, alcohol, and tobacco. Dr. Novella used a type of inductive reasoning referred to as the “cause-and-effect” to try and stop the increasing rates of teenagers smoking.  Two of the ways she tried to stop the smoking among teenagers is increasing the amount of education in schools and the banning of the cigarette advertising towards the youth. Dr. Novello’s effort to put more education in schools would hopefully decrease the amount of teenagers to smoke. So, Cause 1 would be increasing the amount of education in schools, Cause 2 would be banning all the ads of cigarettes and alcohol use that targeted the youth, and the Effect is less teenagers will smoke because of all the school work and minimal advertisement of cigarettes.  Dr. Novello’s actions were a success since the number of reported cases of AIDS and domestic violence declined. 

Inductive Argument that I recently used

As most of you know by reading chapter 7, inductive arguments are slightly stronger or weaker rather than true or false. Inductive arguments claim that their conclusion "probably" follows from the premises, but doesn't necessarily mean it’s true. In the past week I was in this situation where I used an inductive argument. When I was in class my teacher was talking about sports. The main topic was how sport players make a lot of money.  Our class was also talking about how most pro football players are rich and how they are treated like superstars. So my friend was sitting next to me and I whispered to him, “If most pro football players are rich, then my uncle must be full of cash”. So, Premise 1 is that most pro football players are rich and considered superstars. Premise 2 is that my uncle is a pro football player. The conclusion following premises 1&2 are that my uncle probably is rich and considered a superstar. The problem with this inductive argument is that it’s not necessarily true, it could easily be false. 

Pick a Concept

A concept I want to discuss is “argument by elimination”. Argument by elimination is a concept where you rule out different possibilities until only one possibility remains. I use this type of deductive argument a lot when I’m trying to find something. For example, the other day I was walking to my room and realized that I forgot my skateboard. I didn’t know where I forgot it but I had a sense of where I could have left it. The possibilities were either in my economic's class room, my teacher’s office, or at the gym. All these possibilities were chosen because these were the only places I went to during that day. So, first off I went to check my economics class but it wasn’t there. Second place I checked was my teacher’s office but noticed it wasn’t there either. Since neither of those places had it I knew that my skate board had to be in the gym. So once I got to the gym I found my skateboard leaning against the locker that I was using earlier that day.

Death Penalty

By reading some of the passages in Chapter 8, it shows how the death penalty is prohibited in some countries. First off, The United States is the only western democracy that still allows the death penalty. On the contrary, there are a lot of countries that oppose the death penalty. The European Union, consisting of about 27 European countries, opposes the death penalty. Referring to the scriptural passage "who taught us to not to return hate for hate and evil for evil", makes most of these countries oppose the death penalty. A lot of the citizens in Europe have values and principles. Human dignity is a shared value and principle amongst the heritage of the European Union. The punishment to kill a human because of his wrongful actions has revealed itself as a denial of human dignity. So by allowing the death penalty would be going against the majority of the European’s principles and religious views.

Sherlock Holmes

What I think Sherlock Holmes was trying to say is that “facts from the embellishments of hearsay and reports” has ruined the way people think, in certain cases. When people are trying to reason they state their own opinions and what they think is right, but instead you should state the facts and what is correct. For example, when Sherlock was trying to figure out where the horse could be found, he only assumed two places. So, when Sherlock checked one place and didn't see the horse he knew the horse had to be located at the other place.  Sherlock stuck with the facts and what seemed more logical. When you are trying to figure something out or try to reason, make sure to remember what is logical and makes more sense. Don't listen to what others say because most of the information you listen from others might not be the best solution. From my personal experience, I played baseball for 14 years and there was a time when a couple of my friends tried to teach me on how to swing differently. I adjusted to how they taught but I realized I wasn't hitting as good as I did before. I came to a conclusion that there techniques they showed me were not the best even though they thought there techniques were better than mine. For background information I played baseball for 14 years and they never played. It shows that since I have been playing longer I would know how to swing better. In the future, if someone else tells you “try this, it’s better”, don’t always think it’s the right way. When you try to reason, stick with the facts.

"A Concept" discussion #3

While participating in groups, members need to avoid common traps that ruin group communication. One trap I want to discuss in detail is "Overgeneralizations". Overgeneralizations occur when one piece of data concludes that all other comparable data is similar. For example, if you assume that all teenagers will go to college, then you are overgeneralizing. Another example, if you assume that all teenagers will experiment with drugs, then you are overgeneralizing. One step to make sure you don’t fall into this trap is to determine whether the basis of this support is biased in any way. As a critical thinker you need to look at the facts and experiment if your assumptions are true or not. If you say ALL teenagers will experiment with drugs, then you are implying that every teenager in the world will experiment. To make people believe your assumption, you will have to provide a lot of evidence. The next time you overgeneralize data, make sure it’s rational and valid. 

Pg 169 Issues with friends or work

There has been a time when I lost a friend due to an issue at work. In the workplace, I’m a hard worker that puts a lot of effort into my job. I'm an employee that respects all customers and one who follows all the rules. I'm never standing around or acting lazy on the job. One action that annoys me the most is laziness. When I’m doing all the work and the other employees are messing around or not helping at all, it bothers me. So I have been working at my job for 2 years now and a couple months ago I got one of my good friends a job where I work. The issue with my friend working at my job is that I'm noticing him being a little lazy and taking advantage of me. Since I work with him, he thinks he doesn't have to work as hard and thinks it’s just a party at work. I recently told him if he doesn’t act up and start putting more effort into this job he will get fired. Although he is my friend, I have to make sure he has a good work ethic and be thankful for me helping him get a job. In the end, I fired my friend since he put no effort and no emotions into his job. Since we fired him I haven’t spoken or seen him in a while. When you’re working with a friend make sure you act professional.