Entry 3 - Nguyễn Văn Xuân

ENTRY 3: Identifying Bias

ITEM 1: Off the mark

 Source: http://www.offthemark.com/cartoons/prejudice/

      Type of bias: Discrimination - Prejudice

Analysis:  In the picture there are two people: one is an interviewer and another is an interviewee. The interviewer says “well, mr. Oates, you have every qualification… your references are impressive and you seem to have initiative and drive...but you remind me of some one I hated in high school…sorry…” People usually has prejudice with the person who remind them to the person they hated. This is a prejudice in the social.

ITEM 2:  Video

source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byok6vipekQ

Type of bias: Discrimination

Analysis: In this video, there is a black man who tries to climb up the high-tension pole to take the balloon down for the little girl, she scolds soundly to the man and carries the baby away. She doesn’t want the man to come near the baby because he is a black man. The woman has racial discrimination with the black man. Actually, in many regions in the world, there is racial discrimination. People treat the black people badly and keep away from them.

ITEM 3:

Source:

http://www.gadling.com/2011/04/11/us-map-of-stereotypes/
http://www.internationalfriendsinchrist.com/usa-map.htm

Type of bias: Stereotype

Analysis
Two pictures are USA map; one is a stereotype map and one is a geolygical map. From them, we can draw some popular stereotypes among States of American.
For instance:
- In Texas, the sentence "Yes sir/ Yes madam" is common
- In Washington, it usually rains, it is hot in Arizona.

- When people think of California, they usually think about “a life of the party”

-          …

This stereotype is partly good for foreign tourists who want to know more information and have an overview about USA.

Entry 4 - Lê Văn Hồng

Entry 4: Arguments

Item 1:

Source < http://www.fibonicci.com/logical-reasoning/syllogisms/examples-types/>:

Premise 1:       If Johnny is eating sweets everyday, he is placing himself at risk for diabetes.

Premise 2:       Johnny does not eat sweats everyday.

Conclusion:                 Therefore, Johnny is not placing himself at risk for diabetes.

This conclusion is invalid because there are a lot of different reasons besides eating sweets that make Johnny face diabetes. He can place himself for the disease when eating cakes instead of candies.

Item 2:

Source < http://www.fibonicci.com/logical-reasoning/syllogisms-test/medium/>:

Premise 1: All houses are residences.

Premise 2: All sheds are residences.

Conclusion: All houses are sheds.

This conclusion is invalid. There must be no valid conclusion because three cases can occur: All houses are sheds; or Some houses are sheds; or No house is sheds. The inference can be indicated in the diagram below:

Item 3:

Source: < http://www.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/adhom/dilemma.html>

“I can't believe you voted to restrict welfare. Either you didn't understand the proposition, or you just don't care about those less fortunate than yourself.”

This is an example of false dilemma because the speaker assumes that there are only two kinds of people mentioned in the verse above. However, there must be plenty of others who understand the proposition and care about the unfortunate but voted to restrict welfare for some reasons. They might care more about limiting the role of government.

entry 4 Đào Thị Mỹ Hạnh

Entry 4:

Argument structure and Fallacies

Item 1:

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/are-ipods-to-blame-for-rising-crime

“The Urban Institute, a research organization based in Washington, has released an interesting report that suggests that the proliferation of iPods helps account for the nationwide rise in violent crime in 2005 and 2006.

The report [pdf] suggests that “the rise in violent offending and the explosion in the sales of iPods and other portable media devices is more than coincidental,” and asks, rather provocatively, “Is There an iCrime Wave?”

The report notes that nationally, violent crime fell every year from 1993 to 2004, before rising in 2005 and 2006, just as “America’s streets filled with millions of people visibly wearing, and being distracted by, expensive electronic gear.”

v Fallacy post- hoc fallacy

v Analysis:

The rapid increase in iPods happens prior to a rise in nationwide violent crime in 2005 and 2006.

Therefore, proliferation of iPods is the cause of going up in violent offending.

àThis claim “the proliferation of iPods helps account for the nationwide rise in violent crime in 2005 and 2006” is supported by comparison crime rates between 2 phases 1993-2004 and 2005-2006. In the research, it is claimed that sharp development in iPods, presumably meaning that the proliferation of this plays a causal role in increase in violent crime:  “the rise in violent offending and the explosion in the sales of iPods and other portable media devices is more than coincidental”. However, the comparative evidence does not sufficient enough to support the conclusion.

Item 2:

http://vietbao.vn/Khoa-hoc/Nha-may-dien-hat-nhan-dau-tien-du-kien-dat-o-Ninh-Thuan/10839571/188/

Nhà máy điện hạt nhân đầu tiên dự kiến đặt ở Ninh Thuận

“ Vấn đề công chúng lo ngại nhất với loại hình năng lượng này là tính an toàn, gồm an toàn kỹ thuật và rác thải hạt nhân. Tuy nhiên theo ông Tấn, chúng ta hoàn toàn có thể yên tâm về mặt kỹ thuật. Các thiết kế tiên tiến trên thế giới đảm bảo rằng xác suất rủi ro là 10-6 (tức là 1 triệu lò phản ứng, mới có một lò có nguy cơ bị sự cố)”

v Fallacy of relevance: appeal to consequence

v Analysis:

If building the nuclear factory, we have to guarantee safety of the nuclear technique and nuclear rubbish

If safety is not guaranteed enough

------------------------------------------------

So we should not build nuclear factory

Item 3:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matt-kepnes/why-ill-never-return-to-v_b_1241016.html

“While in Nha Trang, I met an English teacher who had been in Vietnam for many years. He said that the Vietnamese are taught that all their problems are caused by the West, especially the French and Americans, and that the West "owes" Vietnam. They expect Westerners to spend money in Vietnam, so when they see western backpackers trying to penny pitch, they get upset and treat them poorly. Those who are spending money, however, seem to be treated quite well. I don't know if this is true or not but based on what I had seen and the experiences I had heard, it did make some sense.”

v Hasty generalization

v Analysis:

The author just takes instances from TINY segment of society- stick up for 87 million Vietnamese people such as:

-       He said “Vietnamese people expect Westerners to spend money in VN”, so they:

+ have a good behavior to Westerners who are rich and willing to spend money

+ Meanwhile, to Western backpackers, Vietnamese have bad attitudes and even easily become angry and treat poorly to them.

à “The Vietnamese are taught that all their problems are caused by the West, especially the French and Americans, and that the West "owes" Vietnam”.

Entry 4 - Lê Thái Hành

I: Item1

A person answered an interview about banning car idea:

“Tôi cho là rất bình thường, có khác gì cắt giảm điện 1 khu phố: Hôm nay cắt bên số chẵn, mai cắt bên số lẻ. Ai cũng thấy hợp lý và phải chấp nhận.Với biển số xe càng phải thế: thành phố chắc chắn giảm được 50% số xe vào nội thành. Cứ đợi đồng thuận thì chẳng làm được gì, cũng như việc đội mũ bảo hiểm ngày nào.”

Source:  http://dantri.com.vn/c728/s728-473324/nguoi-dan-van-phan-ung-voi-y-tuong-chan-le.htm

Premise 1: thực hiện thành công việc cắt giảm điện giảm điện 1 khu phố: Hôm nay cắt bên số chẵn, mai cắt bên số lẻ

Premise 2: thực hiện thành công việc bắt buộc đội mũ bảo hiểm

Conclusion : việc thực hiện biển số xe chẵn lẻ sẽ thành công và thành phố chắc chắn giảm được 50% số xe vào nội thành.

Type of Fallacy:  Fallacy of relevance – Weak analogy

Although two premises are true, the conclusion is false because cutting power, wearing helmet and banning car are three different things. Therefore, the successful implementation of the two things doesn’t mean that the other will be successful too.

II: Item 2

Video – The Power of Words

Link 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hzgzim5m7oU

Link 2: http://www.mediafire.com/?f2xd691p23ou52m

     Description: A blind old man sitting on the street begs for a living. People passing him in the street do not seem to care about him, and a few of them give him some pennies. Accidentally, a woman walking through changes the sentence “I’M BLIND – PLEASE HELP” into the sentence “IT’S A BEAUTIFUL DAY AND I CAN’T SEE IT”. Then, he receives lots of help from people.

     Analysis:

1.      Powerful words create an impression in minds or a dominant image.

2.      An impression in minds or a dominant image changes thinking and results.

3.      A change of words turns ordinary words into powerful ones.

4.      Changing words changes the world.

o       This is deductively valid

III: Item 3

“… Every summer the topic comes up about the relationship between crime and temperature.  A lot of research points to a positive correlation between crime rates and the temperature.  The relationship is simple: crime rates increase in the summer.  No one can explain exactly why this is but it’s been observed as far back as the 1800s.  A conclusion can be drawn with a little common sense though.  When it’s cold or rainy outside you’re probably like me and more interested in watching a Harry Potter marathon or reading a good book instead of going shopping, hanging out with friends, or even going for a run.  The weather dictates how active we are.  In the summers we’re more active for a number of reasons, most of them revolve around more pleasant weather…”

Source: http://weakonomics.com/2009/07/30/why-crime-is-higher-when-its-hot-why-economics-fails-us/

     Analysis:

1.      The weather dictates how active people are.

2.      People committing crime are more active in the summer.

3.      It’s hot in the summer

4.      Crime rates increase in the summer.

5.      Heat causes crime.

o       This is deductively invalid argument.

o       Fallacies: logical fallacies: chicken and egg (correlation implies causation). Just because two things happen at the same time or in the same place, doesn't mean there's any kind of cause and effect going on. It may just be coincidence.

Entry 4_ Đinh Thị Thủy

Argument

Item 1

Bill: "You know, those feminists all hate men."
Joe: "Really?"
Bill: "Yeah. I was in my philosophy class the other day and that Rachel chick gave a presentation."
Joe: "Which Rachel?"
Bill: "You know her. She's the one that runs that feminist group over at the Women's Center. She said that men are all sexist pigs. I asked her why she believed this and she said that her last few boyfriends were real sexist pigs. "
Joe: "That doesn't sound like a good reason to believe that all of us are pigs."
Bill: "That was what I said."
Joe: "What did she say?"
Bill: "She said that she had seen enough of men to know we are all pigs. She obviously hates all men."
Joe: "So you think all feminists are like her?"
Bill: "Sure. They all hate men."

ð       Hasty Generalization( what is true for a member is true for whole group)

Because:

-Rachel make a conclusion : “men are all sexist pigs.” Just because her few boyfriends were  sexist pigs.
- Another one:

Joe: "So you think all feminists are like her?"
Bill: "Sure. They all hate men."

This is the answer for the question at the beginning of the conversation:

Bill: "You know, those feminists all hate men.". Bill and Joe also concluded that all feminists hate men because Rachel( one member of feminists hates men)
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/hasty-generalization.html

Item 2

.
William Paley’s argument from design suggests that a watch and the universe are similar (both display order and complexity), and therefore infers from the fact that watches are the product of intelligent design that the universe must be a product of intelligent design too.

http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/weak-analogy/

ð       Weak analogy:

The structure:

A and B are similar.

(a watch and the universe are similar )

 A has a certain characteristic

(watches are the product of intelligent design )

Thererore:

B must have that characteristic too

(the universe must be a product of intelligent design).

ð       It’s weak analogy because the similarities in the kind and degree of order exhibited by watches and the universe are insufficient to support an inference to a similarity in their origins.

Item 3

Believe in evolution and animal kinship leads normally to selfishness, aggressiveness, and fighting between groups, as well as animalistic attitudes and behaviour by individuals.

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adconseq.html

=> Fallacies of relevance

=> Appeal to consequence

People’ selfishness, aggressiveness, and fighting may be their pesonality, can come from life.

Entry 4_Nguyen Thi Ha Vy

Item 1:

  

Analysis:

Structure fallacy: If you do not use Ponds, you will not have true love => invalid

A: You use Ponds

B: You have true love

If A, then B

    No A

________

    No B

Item 2:

Analysis:

Fallacy of relevance: An election is held to choose talent people to lead the country, their appearance is totally not related. On the other hand, there is no relation between being an leader and having an attractive appearance. However, the big shrimp says: "Can we let a shrimp like this run our great country?". It is absolutely an invalid argument.

Item 3:

http://vnexpress.net/gl/cuoi/2011/12/may-tinh-la-giong-cai/

Máy tính là giống cái

Lâu nay nhiều người sử dụng máy tính mà không biết nó là giống đực hay giống cái.

- Mọi sai sót nhỏ nhặt nó cũng không bỏ qua và phải bắt sửa bằng được mới tiếp tục làm việc.

- Báo lỗi "Bad command or filename" mà chẳng bao giờ có lý do rõ ràng.

- Để máy luôn tốt thì phải thường xuyên nâng cấp và mua phụ kiện cho nó.

Từ ba điều trên có thể kết luận máy vi tính là giống cái vì đặc tính rất phụ nữ gồm "Chấp vặt, khó hiểu và hay vòi vĩnh".

 Analysis:

Fallacies of presumption:

Women "chap vat, kho hieu and hay voi vinh"

Computer "chap vat, kho hieu and hay voi vinh"

Women is female

+

All things have three characteristics (chap vat, kho hieu and hay voi vinh) is female

=> Computer is female

=> invalid

 "All things have three characteristics (chap vat, kho hieu and hay voi vinh) is female" is wrong

=> the argument is invalid

Entry 4_Dao Thi Them

                                    Entry 4

               Argument structures and fallacies

Item1.

http://biodork.wordpress.com/2011/03/28/logical-fallacies-in-advertising/

Analysis

àStructural fallacies

Premise1: If you use new Kleenex hand towel, your hand will be clean

      Premise 2: You want your hands are clean

      Conclusion: Buy new Kleenex hand tower.

à False dilemma:

The picture is the advertising of new Kleenex hand towels. In the picture, it show two different towels: “Kleenex hand towel- a clean and fresh towel every time and old towel. It is belong to a False Dilemma because this advertising shows only two choices. In fact, customers have more choice than that.

Item 2.

"Don't Wake Up in a Roadside Ditch"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7udQSHWpL88

1. When your cable company puts you on hold, you get angry. 

2. When you get angry, you go blow-off steam. 

3. When you go blow-off steam, accidents happen. 

4. When accidents happen, you get an eye-patch. 

5. When you get an eye-patch, people think you’re tough. 

6. When people think you’re tough, people want to see how tough. 

7. And when people want to see how tough, you wake-up in a roadside ditch. 

8. Don’t wake-up in a roadside ditch. Get rid of cable. 

Analysis:

àSlippery slope

This video shows DIRECTV advertising. It is slippery slope because of it has insufficient premise leading to false premise.

Entry 3:

Product Description

Feature List: 

Joggers 
Elderly 
Disabled 
Night Shift Workers 
People Who Live Alone 

INSTRUCTION 

PERSONAL ALARM MODE 
Pull out the metal pin to activate alarm. To turn off the alarm, insert the metal pin to the plug.

TO CHANGE BATTERY 
When the alarm sound goes low, please remove screws from back cover and replace 2x1. 5V AAA size batteries. (Not included ) 

DOOR ALARM MODE 
Use included screw to fix the belt clip on the wall and slide the unit on the clip then hang the strap around the door knob. The alarm will be activated when the door is opened. 

WARNING 
The alarm sound is very loud, never put the unit close the ears.

Analysis:

àpersonal attack

 The picture shows an alarm and focus on content too much. And, these are personal attack because that  this picture show the image of the disable.

ENTRY 4- Đàm Thị Lan

Argument structures and Fallacies

Item 1

-          Source: http://pactiss.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/naturalbodywash.jpg

-          Evaluation: As we can see the advertisement, there are many phrase words which focus on nature: nature instinct containing organic herbs and no artificial substances, natural body wash

Fallacies of relevance    ------------->       appeal to nature

Item 2

-          Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7udQSHWpL88

Analyzing: DIRECTV - "Don't Wake Up in a Roadside Ditch" 2012 Commercial

There is a content of fallacies- fallacy presumption:  slippery slope in Direct TV advertisement.

1. When your cable company puts you on hold, you get angry. 

2. When you get angry, you go blow-off steam. 

3. When you go blow-off steam, accidents happen. 

4. When accidents happen, you get an eye-patch. 

5. When you get an eye-patch, people think you’re tough. 

6. When people think you’re tough, people want to see how tough. 

7. And when people want to see how tough, you wake-up in a roadside ditch. 

8. Don’t wake-up in a roadside ditch. Get rid of cable. 

Item 3

-          Source: Hoa Hoc Tro magazine số 879

Cùng nhìn về một hướng

2 MR ngôi bàn chuyện tình yêu

MR1: Yêu là gì nhỉ? Làm sao biết được nàng yêu ta?

MR2: Yêu là cùng nhìn về một hướng

MR1( nhảy thót lên): thế thì may quá, nàng đã yêu ta rồi.

MR2(ngạc nhiên): ???

MR1( giải thích): hôm  qua tớ đến nhà nàng, nàng ngồi cạnh tớ, nàng mở TV và rồi hai đứa xem.

-          Analysis:  the pharse “cùng nhìn về một hướng”

The phrase has 2 means:

1.       They have something in common such as: hobbies, characteristics, opinions.

2.       They look at the same side. (in situation MR1 and his girlfriend look at TV).

Due to the vagueness of the phrase, there is leading to

Premise 1: love is looking at the same side

Premise 2: MR1 and his girlfriend looked at TV last night

                  

  Conclusion:  she loved him

                     ---------->  Ambiguity fallacies