3) Understanding Weasel Claims

Particularly on page 184 of Epstein's textbook, I did not really understand what a "weaseler" was. It was not one of the major vocab words but the word was in bold. The definition was this.

"A weaseler is a claim that's qualified so much that the apparent meaning is no longer there" (Epstein, 2006).

I thought the definition and the example was vague. It took me a while to understand it because it does not exactly show how their example is a weasel claim.

To give a better understanding on what a weaseler is, I found this website showing specific examples.

http://changingminds.org/disciplines/advertising/claims/weasel.htm

After reading this, I understood weasel claims better. They are basically claims that are potentially useless or weak because they also have doubt or uncertainty.

For example, "I think my music will impress the audience" is a weasel claim. If you are saying that you "think" your music will impress the audience, the audience would probably be unsure about your music if they heard you say that. However, if you said, "My music will impress the audience," the audience will expect to see impressive music. In other words, we should avoid using weasel claims so that our claims or statements are more believable and convincing.

- Pink Bean

2) Is it reliable?

For our first group assignment, we had to evaluate an editorial. An editorial our group had to do was a political issue. From this assignment, I learned that things that are said in editorials may not be reliable. I have to admit that I actually agreed with the editorial we worked on but this assignment helped me realize that even though an argument seems believable, it was still weak.

First of all, we know that evidence is one of the most important things we need to introduce in our arguments. If an argument lacks evidence, then the argument becomes weaker.

Our group had to write about why Republican's vote against Obama's economic proposals. In this argument, the author reached the conclusion that Republicans are simply voting against Obama because he is a Democrat. One of the author's support for his conclusion was that there was a series of events that coincidentally happened. For example, he explains that Republicans have voted affirmatively to certain economic proposals in the past, then he adds that Obama has those same ideas but Republicans refuse to vote for them. Instead, Republicans are waiting for a Republican president to present those certain proposals. From there, that is when Republicans will vote affirmatively for them.

Personally, I thought because this editorial lacked solid evidence, it was a weak argument. The coincidence was shocking and did persuade me but if you are being realistic, coincidences in most cases do not make strong or valid arguments. It is similar to saying that someone is running therefore, they are in a hurry. It is a coincidence because people usually run when they need to get to their destination in time, but it may also mean the person is trying to get exercise.

This assignment helps you realize that there are other options and occassions that can happen which made the author reach his conclusion. Arguments for his conclusion are not only limited to the arguments he presents. There may be other cases, and maybe they can become potential arguments.

- Pink Bean

1) Knowing the Definition of "All" and "Some"

Two terms, often misused, were defined in Chapter 8. The words, "all" and "some," are simple indicators of generalizations. Although these two words are used a lot, not being careful in what you say when you use them may make you state a generalization.

When you use "all," you are referring to everything in the certain group you mention. This means that if there is at least one thing that does not apply to your claim, then your claim simply does not fit into the "all" category because it did not apply to everything. There are some cases where you can use "all" validly.

For example, I can simply say that all of my guitar strings are old because I have been using them for over four years. (I should change them but I want to save money) :P

However, if I wanted to use "all" incorrectly, I can be conceited and say that all of my semi-formal dresses are pretty. Obviously, this cannot be an all-statement because others may think at least one of my dresses is ugly. Since one of my dresses may look ugly to another person, then it takes off the point of me saying that they are all pretty.

In this case, it would be more appropriate to use "some." When you mention some, you are referring to not the whole population, but a portion of it. This portion can be as small as just one out of the million. You cannot use "some" when you want to refer to all.

For example, I can say that some SJSU students have never taken a chemistry class. This is true because I never took a chemistry class. If you are wondering how that is possible, taking a chemistry class was not required in my high school. In fact, we could take an alternate course which was forensic science and still get into a CSU.

However, if I wanted to use "some" incorrectly, I can say that some of the cakes I bake are delicious. This is incorrect because it is possible that all of the cakes I bake taste horrible, or all taste delicious. Basically, you cannot mix "some" and "all" into one meaning.

"All" or "some" may be two overused words, but people can still misuse them. One thing you should be careful about is that people's perspective on certain things may change the meaning from "all" to "some" or "some" to "all." I think all of my dresses are pretty which is why I picked them out. However, someone may think one of my dresses is ugly which turns my claim into a "some" claim.

- Pink Bean