2. Red Bull gives a person wings
He has wings.
Therefore, he drank Red Bull.
3. Valid
4. Valid but not true, because if a person drinks Red Bull they do not actually grow wings.
5. If a person drinks Red Bull, then they will grow wings.
6.
a. The statement is a tautology but does not make sense in real life, because a person does not actually grow wings from drinking Red Bull.
c. Tautologies and truth tables are not always useful because they may prove a statement to be true that is impossible in reality.
7.
1. Source: This ad comes directly from the Red Bull company, which makes it biased because the company is trying to promote Red Bull.
2. Date: The ad is not recent, in fact the company has been sued for using this statement on their advertisements because it is false.
3. Validate accuracy: The ad has previously not been validated and is now false.
4. Hidden agendas: This ad has a hidden agenda because Red Bull is attempting to promote their product through obvious false advertising.
5. Big picture: Even though the argument is valid because in the advertisement the man drank Red Bull and then grew wings, consumers have to consider that it is not physically possible to drink Red Bull and grow wings from it.
8. This argument is a fallacy because it is not possible, it is also a limited choice fallacy because it claims that people can only grow wings from drinking a single product, specifically Red Bull.
9. This narrative helped me think more critically about media information. With some media information it is clear when it is false but sometimes its hard to tell. By looking at information more closely it can help a consumer to distinguish between false and true statements made by companies. Although in the advertisement I used it was clear that the ad was giving false information, it is a good skill to have for advertisements that are more difficult to read. Also, I have never looked at an advertisement critically using mathematical skills so it gave me a different perspective on what is true and false.
kate,
ReplyDeletei like the poster you chose. oh, red bull...
you did a good analysis of this advertisement and you explanations are done in good detail. great job on your truth table. the only issue i see is that in the beginning of your post, you actually have a converse statement, and converse statements are always INVALID, mathematically. so, unfortunately, that makes your venn diagram incorrect. other than that, this is a good entry. =]
professor little