Blog #2

Cheryl Foland-Blog #2

1.       Find a piece of media Content in Magazine: Sunset Magazine: October 2015

2.       Rewrite the statement in the premise/conclusion format

Major Premise: If I make a change (in my dog’s diet), then they will thrive

Minor Premise: I will make a change (because what we feed them matters)

Conclusion: Therefore my dog will thrive (be healthy)

3.       Use a Venn diagram to test whether the argument is valid or invalid

 

All dogs who change their diet will thrive

The dogs’ diet changed
The dog thrives

 

A: Make a change (in Diet)

B: Thrives

X: Dog

 

All A are B (All dogs who make a change in their diet, will thrive)

X is A (the dog’s diet changed)

X is B (the dog will thrive)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.       This Argument is: B) Valid but not true (Unsound)

This argument follows the pattern for a valid argument

But it is not sound as the premise “if we make a change, the dog will thrive” might not be true. We don’t know if the change in diet will make (all dogs) thrive.  In fact, some changes in a dog’s diet could make them sick (ex: if they eat chocolate).

 

 

 

5.       Rewrite the argument as a conditional statement

P: Made a change (in diet)

Q: Dog Thrives

X: Dog

 

If you do not make a change in your dog’s diet they will not thrive

1)      If ~P à~ Q

2)      ~P       A change isn’t made (in diet)

\~Q      The dog doesn’t thrive

 

 

[(~P à~Q) ^P]  à~Q

 

				Hyp 1	Hyp 2		C
P	Q	~P	~Q	~P à~Q	P	(1^2)	~Q	(1^2) à~P
T	T	F	F	T	T	T	F	T
T	F	F	T	T	T	F	T	T
F	T	T	F	F	F	T	F	T
F	F	T	T	T	T	T	T	T

 

                                                                                 

6.       Determine which category the argument falls into and explain why?

The statement in conditional form is a tautology as the last columns has all TRUE values, hence the ENTIRE argument is VALID, but It does not make sense in real life, because there are many changes you could be made in a dog’s diet that would not be healthy and make them thrive, or it could be that they thrive because of another reason, like more exercise  However, the advertisement concludes that what you feed your dog matters, which does make sense in real life; but is dependent on the context of what is eaten and the dog.

Truth tables seem a useful to reliably and objectively construct valid logical/mathematical arguments, but must still be evaluated to determine if the argument is sound.

7.       Test the argument using “steps to evaluating media information” on page 10

1.       Consider the source: The source is fairly reliable; it was the Sunset Magazine

2.       Check the date: This is a recent publication as this was taken from the October 2015 issue.

3.       Validate accuracy: The premise does not give us enough information to determine if the dog food being advertised will make a dog thrive, although Natural Balance Pet Foods does have a website: http://www.naturalbalanceinc.com that allows consumers to compare ingredients.

4.       Watch for hidden agendas: Unfortunately this an advertisement which mean they do have a hidden agenda; which is to sell dog food!

5.       Don’t miss the big picture: The add also says: What we Feed Them Matters, which does indicate they thing it is important to examine what your dog is eating (makes them THRIVE).

 

 

8.       If your argument is a fallacy, does it fall into any of the fallacy categories in section 1A of the textbook? If yes, explain why?

I believe this add uses Circular Reasoning as the argument starts with the conclusion that we need to change our dog’s diet, so they will thrive and then concludes that you need to change their diet to Natural Balance Dog Food.

They have also combined it with a Red Herring  Fallacy as it diverts your attention from what is in the dog food, never mentions if there is something special about the ingredients or the process, and neglects to give the reader any nutritional information or reasons why this dog food  is needed to make sure the dog thrives

 

9.       Write a brief narrative detailing whether this experiment helped or didn’t help you to think more critically about media information?

 

I do believe that we are living at a time when the media is having a greater and greater impact on our lives. It is influencing our opinions and our beliefs and it is getting harder and harder to separate truth, from fact, and the emotional.  Many of us have become complacent about challenging what we hear and see in the media and no longer question the motives of the corporations that own the media. This makes it critically important to learn to recognize faulty reasoning and develop skills like we are learning in class to detect when arguments and their conclusions are not well supported.