Ch 2. Q.3

The concept of this week’s discussion that I think is important is empathy. According to chapter 2 in Think, empathy means “the capacity to enter into and understand the emotions of others” and this means a person understanding the emotions of others. When someone expresses their opinion about any issue or topic, as much as feelings should not be incorporated into arguments, subconsciously we do. I think this concept is important because we should consider people’s feelings when sharing their opinions. The book says this concept makes us better listeners and communicators and I believe this happens because once people’s feelings are involved, we empathize with the people. I feel that if we were to express our thoughts about a sensitive topic such as, the death penalty, we would want people to consider our feelings and want people to be extremely careful about what is going to be said. The book says that empathy motivates people to correct mistakes done in the past. This is extremely true because if it is recognized that feelings were hurt, there would be a different to go about that same situation in a different way.

Ch.2 Q.2

            Thomas Aquinas, the author of Summa Theologica, provides valid points about the existence of god. His first example was the following: ”Now whatever is in motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except it is in potentiality to that towards which it is in motion..” this statement is somewhat confusing but the point the author tries to make is if something is in motion, it must have been put in motion by something/someone. Aquinas explains that according to science, things will continue to be in motion until someone/something stops the motion. The question that is implied by Thomas is how did god come about if something needs to be there before god to start something? I would have to agree with Aquinas and his arguments over Dawkins. Dawkins argues against every argument Thomas makes with the statement that god is immune to “regress”. I was raised in a catholic household but I do not agree with the baggage it carries such as, saints. I strictly believe that there is a god and agree with Aquinas.

Ch.2; Q.1

When it comes to choosing a career, it is vital to know what your weaknesses and strengths are. In college, they stress the importance of knowing weaknesses and strengths when choosing a major because if someone is not successful in public speaking, they would not become a lawyer or a teacher. I think that my strength is in deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is going from the general to the specifics, or also from cause to effect. I believe that this is a very good quality to have in the career of a lawyer. I want to pursue a career in law and I think knowing how to recognize the cause and the effect of a crime or issue would help win cases. It’s good to know what you are good at when picking a major or a career because it’ll be more enjoyable. Not knowing what you’re good at can result in changing majors multiple times and not being good at the career you chose.

Chapter 7. Q.3

In Chapter 7 of Think, a very important issue the book addresses is, “Evaluating Inductive Arguments Based on Analogies”. According to the text, an analogy is a comparison between two or more similar events or things. The indicator words or phrased of an analogy are the following: like, as, similarly, or compared to. While recognizing analogies in inductive arguments, the book explains steps to successfully evaluate these types of analogies. Step 1 is to identify the comparisons being made. It is important to understand what is being compared. Step 2 is to list the similarities made between the two items that are being compared. If there are multiple similarities, then this analogy makes for a strong conclusion. Step 3 is to list all the dissimilarities. If there are multiple dissimilarities, this can affect the overall argument being made. Step 4 is to combine steps two and three and combine the similarities and dissimilarities to decide what is affecting or supporting the argument. Step 5 is to examine all possible counteranalogies that can be made. Once they are found, it is a possibility that the counteranalogies may be stronger than the argument. Step 6 is to determine whether the analogy supports the conclusions. I believe that this is a very important section in the chapter because just as inductive arguments are everywhere, so is inductive reasoning.

Chapter 7: Q.2

In Chapter 7 of Think, the article discusses Doctor Antonia Novello’s success story in Puerto Rico. She grew up in poverty and constant illness as a child. Most people who grow up in such standards would get discouraged and would not try to find a solution. Dr. Novello was not discouraged, she was actually motivated and driven to find a better life for her, to stop living in poverty. Dr. Novello realized that there was an issue with children and teenagers smoking. She noticed that since the advertisement of Joe Camel cigarettes, this problem presented itself among teenagers. She looked for a solution to help this issue among teens. The successful doctor figured that if the problem started with the propaganda of cigarettes, she would ban ads that were directed towards children and teenagers. This was cause and effect because she saw that the ads were causing children and teenagers to start smoking and she was able to find a solution for this problem.

Chapter 7: Q. 1

According to Think, an inductive argument claims that a conclusion probably follows the premises. Most of our arguments are inductive because we think if this, then that. My previous inductive argument was about the death penalty and the views of Sister Prejean. My argument was the following: Murder is wrong. The death penalty is murder. Therefore, the death penalty is probably wrong. According to the text, there are certain words that work as warning signs for an inductive argument such as, probably. My argument is an inductive argument because there is a possibility of error in my argument. For example, the death penalty is not always seen as murder therefore, the death penalty is not viewed as wrong.  We use inductive reasoning in our everyday life by judging the weather and deciding what to wear for that day or when we judge people based on assumptions we make by what they are wearing  and what color their hair is.