LAST BLOG

As the semester comes to a close, I am realizing that it is going to be weird to not blog anymore. I know I can do it on my own, but the general population is not as interesting as the people in this class. I think we have had some pretty good discussions over the last 15 weeks and I am glad that I was able to meet you all. Logic has been a good experience for me and has taught me what true hard work is.

Well, I should probably go study for this logic final that we are going to have. The only way to pass is to study and study and study and study and study and study and study and study and study.... oh yeah and then after that I should study a little bit :).

Happy holidays to all and to all a good night!! :) haha

I FINALLY GET IT!

Now that we are 95% of the way through the semester, I am finally started to understand logic. It is sad that  I am finally starting to understand it now that we are almost done with the class.
In section 4.7, I realized that I was finally starting to get it and then I got my quiz back from last week and really saw a significant improvement.
In section 5.1, I did not struggle at all. I grasped these concepts of categorical syllogisms right away. I am so glad that all my hard work is finally paying off.

I have been spending so much time studying this subject all semester because I was struggling so badly and I have finally shined through. Hard work really does pay off!!

Does anyone agree or disagree?

Kyle...

This past week, I used Kyle as a resource for the first time. He was very helpful to me. We worked through anything that I did not understand and then kind of just discussed philosophy in general. I definitely think I will be using him to help me again before the final. For anyone who is struggling at all, he does his best to help you understand and cleared up a lot of things that I was struggling with.

So I guess all I am really trying to say is use your resources to help you get better at logic (Kyle is the best resource I have found).

Venn Diagrams and the Traditional Standpoint

So in section 4.6, there were some problems that have answers in the back that I got wrong and I was hoping to get some help. This one really bugged me because I just can not seem to figure out why it is wrong.

Section II
4. It is false that some duck hunters are animal rights activists.
Therefore, some duck hunters are not animal rights activists.

So from this I derived the simple argument:
It is false that some D are A.
Therefore, some D are not A.

From the Boolean standpoint, I got that the first statement gives a shaded middle, and the second statement gives an x in the left hand box.
I got the same results when testing from the Aristotelian standpoint.

Section 4.5

So I have been working on section 4.5 since 11am this morning. I just now decided to take a break and see if anyone could help me out. I understand the traditional square of opposition and the fallacies, but I am having an extremely difficult time understanding the proving validity part. I went through and did the problems in I, II, III, and IV, but I just do not get the last part. Did anyone understand it that is willing to help me?

Thanksgiving

Happy Thanksgiving!!!


I hope everyone has a great few days off. I also hope everyone eats a lot of good homecooked food :). On Friday or Saturday I will post again and take some Thanksgiving discussions and post them up so we can talk about them. Have some fun :)

Chapter 4

Here are a few examples from section 4.4. See if you can figure out whether they are conversions, obversions, or contrapositions and then state the truth value.

1. Some astronomers are interested in biology.
Therefore, some biologists are interested in astronomy.

2. No families are perfect.
Therefore, no imperfections are non- families.

3. All people who know how to swim are competitive swimmers.
Therefore, all competitive swimmers are people who know how to swim.

4. Some hired assassins are just average human beings.
Therefore, some hired assassins are not just average human beings.

What do you think?

Midterm

I finally figured out logic... at least to some point. I managed to get an 87% by studying for hours and hours and then taking the test. The only multiple choice questions I got wrong were 16,18, and 20. Then, I just made the mistake of saying the third argument was a valid one and did not provide a counterexample. All in all, I am happy with my grade as I saw a significant improvement since the quizzes.

What did you guys think of the midterm?

Studying for the midterm

I think I have decided what I am going to do to prepare myself for the midterm and I am just curious to know if you guys agree with my way of doing it. I plan to do as professor Silliman said and write out the informal fallacies over and over again until the night before the test. I also plan to go over the notes I have taken from each section numerous times and make sure all of the information makes sense to me. After that, I plan to go all the way back to section 1.1 and do all of the starred problems up to section 3.5. By doing this, I hope to be able to find my weaknesses and strengthen them by Monday when we have the test.

Good, bad, any thoughts ?

Committed to Safe City Streets

Saturday November 5, 2011

Our city is well poised in Berkshire County, with its cultural institutions and beautiful landscapes of lakes and mountains, to attract new businesses. However, I’m very concerned about the recent increase in crime.

This is not an asset for attracting people to Pittsfield. When is there going to be a leader in City Hall who will address this issue head-on? I’ve watched the debates on PCTV, listened to the radio and read the newspaper and the only candidate who appears to have a real plan to tackle crime is Dan Bianchi. Dan has stressed the need of collaboration between Pittsfield law enforcement, the sheriff’s office, local police departments and the state.

Join me on Nov. 8 in voting for Dan Bianchi because he is committed to addressing crime in our community and making our streets safe.

REBECCA KNOX

Pittsfield

http://www.berkshireeagle.com/letters/ci_19269178 

Does anybody detect any fallacies here? I actually did not find any. 

POSTING IN THE BLOG

I think it would be helpful to everyone if we posted earlier in the week. I am posting on Monday morning to get ahead, not because I forgot to post last week or something. I just think we could all learn more and engage in better conversation if we did not wait until Sunday night to post something. I am busy just like all you guys, but it only takes about fifteen minutes at most to make a good post. If you just add it into your homework schedule on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, then you will be able to post a blog for the week, check out other people's blogs, and comment on them. Please make an effort as it will make blogging more fun if more than just a few people are faithful to it.

Does anyone agree or disagree about this?

Logic Questions in 3.4

So when I did section 3.4 today, I had some difficulties. There were soooooo many problems that my brain was a pile of mush by the time I was done. I will put up some of the questions I had problems with and see if anyone either had the same problems or has answers for me. :)

Section 3.4 I
Numbers 2, 3, 7, 10, 13, and 16.

Section 3.4 III
Numbers 1-50.... just kidding
but really Numbers 4,5,8,10,12,19,24, 35, 41,43 and 48

If anyone got the answers or also had trouble with those questions feel free to talk about them :).

Essay... reworking it again and again

I have reworked my essay about three times. After reworking it, I brought it to writing associates to make sure I was on the right track and doing everything correctly. I have used the writing associates two times and I am actually sitting in the library waiting for their help a third time. They have really helped me with my essay. They take the time to sit down with you and read through the essay and the checklist to make sure everything is working correctly. Anyone who is struggling with the essay, I would suggest the writing associates. Has anybody else used them? If so, did you think they were helpful? If not, does this make you want to?

Today's Class

I liked today's class a lot. It was a great way to see other people's essays and understand where they might be coming from. It was also nice to do peer editing. I really value the opinions of my peers. They are helpful and insightful just like a teacher's input, but it is from people you are close to and hang out with. What did you guys think of it?

Essay... reworked it again :)

1.   P1: College graduates make an average of 1 million dollars more in their lifetimes than non-graduates.

2.   P2: One can be successful in helping others, which helps to make the world a better place.

3.   P3: Residence life helps people diversify themselves.

4.   P4: College helps to make people more interesting.

C   C:  College Education is important to a successful life

So this is what I have come up with for my premises and conclusion for my essay. This is the third time I have reworked it and I am still open for suggestions. Anybody have any ideas about this or any suggestions on how to make it better?

Argument Essay

So I originally had a thesis and premises, but Professor Silliman thinks I should take one of my premises and make it my thesis. My only problem with this is I don't know what to then make the premises.

My new thesis: People who go to college are generally more successful in their lives than those who do not attend college.

One of my premises could be that those who go to college make an average of 1 million dollars more in their lifetimes, but I am not sure what I should use for others. Any ideas for me?

2.2 Exercises

I had a couple problems with the questions in section 2.2. Most of them were pretty simple, but there were a few things that I got caught up on.

I could not decide whether or not scarlet or graceful dancer were terms or not terms. Scarlet seemed to me like it was an adjective and therefore would not be a term, but I was not sure. Graceful dancer seemed like it could go either way because graceful is an adjective, but dancer is a common name.
        Any ideas about these terms or non terms?

8. The intension of a term determines how specific the term is.
         Is this true or false? I was unable to decide.

Section 2.2

I thought section 2.2 was a really interesting section. Like we were talking about last week with section 2.1,  I thought this was applicable immediately. I was able to grasp the material rather quickly and I was able to do all of the problems. This is the first section that I have really had an easy time with thus far. I am hoping it is because I am adjusting to the whole idea of logic. I am teaching myself what is the best way to learn logic and, thus, I understood this section. Anybody else have any feelings similar or different than mine?

Paper and more logic

For this paper, I have decided to write about homesickness. I am going to do so because for the first month I was here, I was homesick. I want to shed light on how many people are homesick when they leave home to go away to college for the first time. What do you guys think? Have any of you experienced this since you have been at school? If so, what kinds of things did you do to deal with it?


On another note, logic is becoming more and more interesting to me as I study it more. I have learned so much in these first few weeks. I want to continue to build on what I have learned. Kyle said today how he has used logic to help him improve in other subjects. He said writing papers has gotten easier because the philosophy teachers are strict graders and it has helped him develop new and useful skills. I feel like breaking the paper down into steps will make it much easier to write because, whether we notice it or not, we are doing the hard part right now. What are your thoughts on this?

Blogging about logic

I have learned so much since the semester started. On September 7th, I knew nothing more about logic than that it was one of the classes I was taking. I now know that there are arguments and nonarguments. From arguments, you have to decide whether they are deductive or inductive. If it is deductive, you have to figure out whether it is valid or invalid(all are unsound) and then figure out the soundness. If it is inductive, you have to figure out whether it is strong or weak(all are uncogent) and then determine cogency. A month ago, this would have been like reading a foreign language, but after taking this class for a few weeks, I have learned so many new things. Now I just need to start understanding more of the new concepts. I know what they are, I just have to learn which ones work at which times. I am hoping that I will learn by continuing to do all of the homework problems and taking notes on each section.
Anybody have any other suggestions of how to get better at logic? other than practice, practice, practice

Argument #2 in standard form

LETTER

Life Sentence for Youths?

Published: September 18, 2011 (excerpt)

Studies prove that all but a very small percentage of youth — between 5 and 10 percent — mature out of criminal behavior. Therefore, it is inappropriate to impose a final, irrevocable judgment on young people.


P1: A very small percent of youth mature out of criminal behavior.
C: Therefore, it is inappropriate to impose final, irrevocable judgement on young people

Argument in Standard form

Lawlessness Has Had Its Upsides

September 13, 2011

David Plotz, the editor of Slate, is the author of "The Genius Factory: The Curious History of the Nobel Prize Sperm Bank."

The American fertility business has long been a cowboy enterprise — cavalier about rules, casual about paperwork, irritated by government interference. Its strange place on the political spectrum shielded it from the regulation that guides other kinds of medicine, or real estate, or even used car sales. Conservatives, skeptical of regulation, were glad to leave fertility alone, and let it grow into a profitable marketplace. Liberals, normally fond of regulation, were leery of doing anything to dictate women’s reproductive choices. The result was an open field.

The fertility business needs regulation, but we’ll miss the lawlessness when it’s gone.

And there’s no doubt that the American fertility business has been way too chaotic: Sperm banks run by unqualified cranks, unscrupulous egg donation schemes, and practically no way to keep track of who’s fathering whom. (In my reporting, I’ve met numerous sperm donors who travel from bank to bank to bank, spawning uncounted numbers of kids, and leaving virtually no paper trail.) It’s certain that more regulation, and an end to donor anonymity, would clean up the industry, soothe customers, and help donor offspring.

Still, we’ll miss the lawless fertility business when it’s gone. Its lack of rules spurred innovation, and transformed fertility from a prudish, conservative corner of medicine into a consumer-driven business. Entrepreneurial sperm bankers broke the monopoly that organized medicine had over fertility choices, giving women the chance to choose — no, to shop for — their sperm donor. This willingness to try anything made the American fertility business the liveliest in the world. More regulation — necessary as it is — will diminish that capitalist energy, and bring fertility back in dreary line with the rest of American medicine: more expensive, more defensive, and more responsive to insurers than to customers.

P1: The American fertility business has always been cavalier about rules, casual about paperwork, and irritated by government interference.

P2: The American fertility business has been way too chaotic. 

C: It’s certain that more regulation, and an end to donor anonymity, would clean up the industry, soothe customers, and help donor offspring.

Not quite positive if I am right. I would like to see what you guys have to say about it. :)

Argument in standard form

Lawlessness Has Had Its Upsides

September 13, 2011

David Plotz, the editor of Slate, is the author of "The Genius Factory: The Curious History of the Nobel Prize Sperm Bank."

The American fertility business has long been a cowboy enterprise — cavalier about rules, casual about paperwork, irritated by government interference. Its strange place on the political spectrum shielded it from the regulation that guides other kinds of medicine, or real estate, or even used car sales. Conservatives, skeptical of regulation, were glad to leave fertility alone, and let it grow into a profitable marketplace. Liberals, normally fond of regulation, were leery of doing anything to dictate women’s reproductive choices. The result was an open field.

The fertility business needs regulation, but we’ll miss the lawlessness when it’s gone.

And there’s no doubt that the American fertility business has been way too chaotic: Sperm banks run by unqualified cranks, unscrupulous egg donation schemes, and practically no way to keep track of who’s fathering whom. (In my reporting, I’ve met numerous sperm donors who travel from bank to bank to bank, spawning uncounted numbers of kids, and leaving virtually no paper trail.) It’s certain that more regulation, and an end to donor anonymity, would clean up the industry, soothe customers, and help donor offspring.

Still, we’ll miss the lawless fertility business when it’s gone. Its lack of rules spurred innovation, and transformed fertility from a prudish, conservative corner of medicine into a consumer-driven business. Entrepreneurial sperm bankers broke the monopoly that organized medicine had over fertility choices, giving women the chance to choose — no, to shop for — their sperm donor. This willingness to try anything made the American fertility business the liveliest in the world. More regulation — necessary as it is — will diminish that capitalist energy, and bring fertility back in dreary line with the rest of American medicine: more expensive, more defensive, and more responsive to insurers than to customers.

P1: The American fertility business has always been cavalier about rules, casual about paperwork, and irritated by government interference.

P2: The American fertility business has been way too chaotic. 

C: It’s certain that more regulation, and an end to donor anonymity, would clean up the industry, soothe customers, and help donor offspring.

Not quite positive if I am right. I would like to see what you guys have to say about it. :)

About Philospohy

I have never taken a philosophy course before, but I am ready to try something new and learn about it. The philosophy toolkit had a lot of information in it that I am still trying to learn and understand, but I will work hard to make sure I do understand it. Philosophy seems like a very interesting course to study and I hope to learn a lot over the next fifteen weeks.