FLASH SALE - 25% OFF - USE CODE: FLASH25 (25 HOURS ONLY)
September 24, 2012 @ 12:35 PM

Inactive

Provide an example of a reasonably cogent argument for some claim. What further information would undermine the argument (without counting against any of the premises)?


please translate this in english or ebonics someone
September 24, 2012 @ 01:12 PM
DStyles

Post: 9513

Join Date: Mar 2007

Location: Brooklyn, NY

I do not help out snitches.

Last.fm - DStyles23 Xbox Live GT: DStyles23

September 24, 2012 @ 01:26 PM
Your Fan

Post: 492

Join Date: May 2012

Provide an example of a reasonably cogent argument for some claim. What further information would undermine the argument (without counting against any of the premises)?


please translate this in english or ebonics someone


Give an example of an argument that's believable. "For some claim" Would be the topic you're arguing. The second part would basically be points that whoever you're arguing to would be able to bring up to dispute it or could be information you choose to leave out that could hurt your argument, but won't have any real significant place if you're pro-whatever you're arguing about.

Ex: Arguing that Obama is a good president, but undermining the fact that he increased the U.S. debts in his 4 years. Does that take away from him being a good president? No, but it's not something you would want to brag about.

Hope I helped and wasn't to broad or vague.
September 24, 2012 @ 02:04 PM

Inactive

Provide an example of a reasonably cogent argument for some claim. What further information would undermine the argument (without counting against any of the premises)?


please translate this in english or ebonics someone


Give an example of an argument that's believable. "For some claim" Would be the topic you're arguing. The second part would basically be points that whoever you're arguing to would be able to bring up to dispute it or could be information you choose to leave out that could hurt your argument, but won't have any real significant place if you're pro-whatever you're arguing about.

Ex: Arguing that Obama is a good president, but undermining the fact that he increased the U.S. debts in his 4 years. Does that take away from him being a good president? No, but it's not something you would want to brag about.

Hope I helped and wasn't to broad or vague.


okay I see that makes sense. Have you taken his before? seems like you got it on lock
September 24, 2012 @ 02:27 PM
Your Fan

Post: 492

Join Date: May 2012

Provide an example of a reasonably cogent argument for some claim. What further information would undermine the argument (without counting against any of the premises)?


please translate this in english or ebonics someone


Give an example of an argument that's believable. "For some claim" Would be the topic you're arguing. The second part would basically be points that whoever you're arguing to would be able to bring up to dispute it or could be information you choose to leave out that could hurt your argument, but won't have any real significant place if you're pro-whatever you're arguing about.

Ex: Arguing that Obama is a good president, but undermining the fact that he increased the U.S. debts in his 4 years. Does that take away from him being a good president? No, but it's not something you would want to brag about.

Hope I helped and wasn't to broad or vague.


okay I see that makes sense. Have you taken his before? seems like you got it on lock


Yeah kinda I'm on the debate team.
September 24, 2012 @ 08:03 PM
Soul Rize

Post: 2085

Join Date: Dec 2010

Location: Houston

is god all powerful? Yes, then can he create a bolder big enough that he himself can not lift?

Cmon get down with a real nigga wussup

October 5, 2012 @ 01:10 AM

Inactive

what about these?

1. Provide an example of two sentences with the same literal truth conditions that suggest very different things.

2. The classic sorites paradox is that one grain of sand cannot make a heap, and adding just one grain of sand to something that is not a heap will not give you a heap. It seems, then, that no matter how many grains of sand you use, you cannot make a heap, but this is clearly false. What do you think goes wrong with this reasoning?
October 5, 2012 @ 04:28 AM
falsenaga

Post: 420

Join Date: Sep 2012

Only in Intro Logic, so #1 is a bit over my head.. But I'll have a go at the second..

It's impossible to dictate the point at which the non-heap of sand would become a heap, for it's all very much relative. Nothing constitutes a 'heap'; there is no turning point, it is just a matter of opinion. This is a famous paradox (as noted) for this very reason.. that there is no real answer, it's just an interesting thinking point. However, if you were to disagree with the reasoning, you could go about it in the following way:
If this is the basic argument presented by the paradox..

Premise #1: X grain(s) of sand is not a heap
Premise #2: X+1 grain(s) of sand is not a heap
Conclusion: X+1...z grain(s) of sand is not a heap

I would go about disagreeing with the validity of the argument by claiming Premise #1 to be false, and justify my reasoning that it is false by claiming that there simply is no such thing as heap (for reasons I explained above). It would then follow that the rest of the argument is invalid, and now you can stop losing sleep over it. Granted, you could also disagree with Premise #2, and claim that there exists a boundary where it becomes a heap and that the boundary is simply unknowable.. Whatever floats your boat.
October 5, 2012 @ 01:16 PM

Inactive

Only in Intro Logic, so #1 is a bit over my head.. But I'll have a go at the second..

It's impossible to dictate the point at which the non-heap of sand would become a heap, for it's all very much relative. Nothing constitutes a 'heap'; there is no turning point, it is just a matter of opinion. This is a famous paradox (as noted) for this very reason.. that there is no real answer, it's just an interesting thinking point. However, if you were to disagree with the reasoning, you could go about it in the following way:
If this is the basic argument presented by the paradox..

Premise #1: X grain(s) of sand is not a heap
Premise #2: X+1 grain(s) of sand is not a heap
Conclusion: X+1...z grain(s) of sand is not a heap

I would go about disagreeing with the validity of the argument by claiming Premise #1 to be false, and justify my reasoning that it is false by claiming that there simply is no such thing as heap (for reasons I explained above). It would then follow that the rest of the argument is invalid, and now you can stop losing sleep over it. Granted, you could also disagree with Premise #2, and claim that there exists a boundary where it becomes a heap and that the boundary is simply unknowable.. Whatever floats your boat.


for the 1st question, I answered:

"1) You're not going to die.
2) You're not going to die from eating that cheeseburger."
October 11, 2012 @ 04:18 PM

Inactive

new question (i havent even read it yet, im gonna answer it on Friday cuz im doing a diff quiz now, but it'd be cool to peep your answers before i take a crack at it)

Choose either an argument from ignorance or an appeal to authority. For each of these fallacies, there are cases that seem quite a bit like the fallacy, but are not. Provide an example which clearly is a fallacy and one that seems like a fallacy, but is not one. As always, examples should be considerably different from those in the textbook or course materials.
October 11, 2012 @ 04:19 PM
oneallah

Post: 3562

Join Date: Mar 2012

Location: in yo closet

box logos?

or no box logos?

scientists have tried to figure this out for the past 1000 years
October 11, 2012 @ 04:48 PM
dmwalking

moderator

Post: 3640

Join Date: Aug 2007

Location: New England

LOL Homework Hotline. Niggas been helpful on HB lately. Props. Wish I could help, but this is over my head. Hahah. Sounds like a class I'd love though.

guy on some broke bus. Love, Sosa. "Don't feed the trolls" initiative coming soon. We can rebuild.


Please login first to reply.
Back To Top