Amy Martinez Blog 2

Blog 2

1. A saying and slogan that has been going around the media and posted along the freeways is “ Drive sober or get pulled over”

2. major premise: if you are drunk you will get pulled over

    minor premise: if you are sober you are not drunk

    conclusion: if you are sober you will not get pulled over 

3. the argument is valid because when people are drunk they do get pulled over and get a ticket. therefore if the driver is sober they will not get pulled over and if they are not sober they will get pulled over. 

4. this argument is valid and sound because it is true and the premises lead to the conclusion.

5. you will get pulled over, if you don’t drive sober. 

6. this statement is not a tautology because not all drivers that aren’t sober get pulled over, however it is very common that a driver that is not sober does get pulled over. and truth tables are very useful in deciding if an argument is a tautology or not. 

7. it is a fallacy because even though it is valid and true there are cases in which people drive drunk and don’t get pulled over in real life and cases in which people drive sober and do get pulled over. 

8. This blog post helped me apply what we are learning in class to real life situations. I also learned that arguments and statements can be valid but still false under circumstances.  

Blog #2

8. The information I found does not fall into the category of fallacy because it is a recent source that is credible and similar information is found elsewhere. This argument is valid because carrots contain vitamin A which support eye health. The information is not saying that eating carrots will improve your vision but they are good for your eyes. 9. This experiment did not help me better my skills in evaluating sources. Having done research in the past I am well equipped with the skills to evaluate sources and information. However, the steps listed in the book are helpful to keep in mind while doing research.

Believe it or Not: Blog Post #2

Believe it or Not

Shaela Kilmartin

1.

Popchips ad

2. premise 1 = If you eat anything other than pop chips, you will feel guilty

    premise 2 = A person eats popchips over anything else

    conclusion = therefore, a person will feel less guilty

3. *passed in at class*

4.  (b.) Valid but not true

5.  p = a person eats anything other than popchips

     q = a person feels less guilty

[ (p -> ~q) ^ q ] -> ~p

6. 

a. The statement is a tautology, but it does not make sense in real life. Chips cannot make you feel less guilty. 

b. It does have a solution mathmatically, it is a tautology

c. Truth tables help you determine if a statement is a tautology because all you have to do is look at the last column and see if it is all true. 

7. The source is clear. There is not a date. It seems acurate. The information is presented well. It seems not true though, a chip cannot make you feel less guilty. 

8.  Yes it is valid, but not true, therefore it is unsound. Therefore it is a fallacy.

9. I still am confused about this entire concept, and I don't really think this helped to be honest.

Blog 2

Lorena Aguilera Santana

Blog Post 2 - Believe it or not

1. Statement: Good grades, cash rewards.

2. Statement in premise/conclusion format: with good grades you get cash rewards. I have good grades. I get cash rewards.

3.

4. In this case, the argument is valid and sound. I have good grades; therefore the bank will give me cash rewards.

5. Conditional statement: If I get good grades, I’ll get cash rewards.

P	Q	PàQ
T	T	T
T	F	F
F	T	T
F	F	T

6. It is not a tautology because people don’t always get cash rewards; it makes sense in real life because it depends on the grades.

7. The advertisement I analyzed was from Discover Bank and it was published in the September’s edition of Forbes magazine. It looks real and it also includes contact information, like the website and phone numbers. I also think the argument makes sense and that it’s a reasonable idea.

8. It’s not a fallacy.

9. This experiment did help me think more critically about media information because we are surrounded by it in today’s society, Analyzing the information that’s presented to us is important because that way we can make better decisions when it comes to the services and products that advertisements are trying to sell.

Sydney Silverman Blog2

Rebecca Brownsword Believe it or not

Rebecca Brownsword Believe it or not

1. “Red bull gives you wings” 
2. Premise: If I drink Red bull I will get wings

       Minor- I drank red bull

       Conclusionion: Therefore I will get wings.

3.

4.This argument is valid but not true. The premise leads to the conclusion but it is not true that if you drink red bull that you will actually get wings. 

5. If a person drinks red bull then they will grow wings

6a. Just because this is a tautology does not mean it works in real life. People do not grow wings

c. Truth tables don't always tell the truth

7. It doesn't apply because red bull cant actually give you wings.

8.This is fallacy because it is not true.

9. This experiment helped how I look at the media because it tells me that people will say just about anything to make a product seem appealing

Believe it or Not

1. If you use axe body spray with forbidden fruits, then nice girls will turn naughty.
   2. Nice girls turned naughty. Therefore, you used axe body spray
3. Invalid and Not True. P-Q, Q is true if P is true. What defines naughty and were not sure if Axe Body Spray makes them naughty.
4.
5. If you do not use axe body spray, nice girls will not turn naughty.
6.
a. It seems like it could make for a valid argument following the premise, conclusion format. But, in real circumstances it could make sense. There could be women that like that scent and could make them naughty. But, realistically no it probably would not work.
b. The solution is proved to be unsound and invalid. Yes, it makes sense why it would be invalid in real life.
c. I think tautologies help define whether and argument is valid or invalid and can be driven further to show its affect on real life arguments.
7. Fallacy
8. There is a appeal to popularity, a false cause and would appeal to ignorance
9. It helped me look more into depth on how some advertisements are so weak and present a silly or not supported argument.

1. Smoking cigarettes causes lung cancer

2. Smoking causes cancer
I smoke cigarettes
-------------------
Therefore, I have lung cancer

3.

4. This argument would be invalid and true. Most lung cancer patients smoke, but I smoke and do not have lung cancer.

5. If I smoke cigarettes, then I have lung cancer

      p: I smoke cigarettes

      q: I have lung cancer

      if p and q, then q

       ( p ^q ) -> q

6.

a/b. This statement is not a tautology, that makes sense because not all smokers develop lung cancer, however lung cancer is still very common in smokers.

c. Truth tables are useful in determining if an argument is a valid tautology.

Blog Post #2 Quantitative Reasoning

Savanna Phelan-Jones

Blog Post #2

1.         A common saying that can often be found slipping in and out of the media is “An apple a day keeps the doctor away.”

2.           If you eat an apple then the

Major premise:

Minor premise:

Conclusion: 

3.           The argument is valid because: Eating apples is good for you. Therefore, you won’t go to the doctor is you eat an apple a day because it is healthy. It is a fallacy but it is also valid in the math world. The Venn Diagram proves that it is a valid argument.

4.           This argument falls under the category of valid and also not sound (true), because you can make multiple Venn Diagrams for it, and you can eat an apple a day and still go to the doctor.

5.           If you eat an apple a day, then you won’t have to go to the doctor.

6.           Using truth tables I have determined that in conditional form this statement has a mathematical conclusion; I figured out it was a tautology indeed. It was true on all accounts. However, even though it makes sense mathematically, it doesn’t add up in real life; there is no connection between eating apples and doctor’s visits, so it isn’t logically sound in real life. Truth tables can prove tautologies; that is how you figure out if it is a tautology or not.

7.           The source of this statement is undetermined and therefore unreliable, and the date is unclear (probably recent, as a professor probably whipped this example up for practice sometimes). While thinking about this argument in regards to the five steps to evaluating media information, it is safe to say that this argument is not credible nor accurate.

8.           It is a fallacy! It falls under the category of hasty generalization.

9.           This experiment helped me a little to better understand how the kind of stuff we are working on connects mathematically to real world logic. I also better understand now how media information is not always reliable, and arguments can often be based off of fallacies or flawed arguments.