Concept from reading

In today’s world there is a big
need for organized communication. People
need to understand how people communicate or send messages. Seeing the big
picture when communicating with others is crucial for success. Many messages
have been lost because communications amongst people have not been clearly
organized. When using an organizational system, no one can work alone or in
isolation. As a whole, the system must work together to get things done. There must also be good relationships overall
for a team to persevere in their duties. The relationship between the superiors and the
subordinates must be good enough to keep a work related conversation in
organization. Team leaders and team
members should actually work together in order to come up with a solution to
the problems that the team has. Communication
channels should always be used as well. This means that even though someone may
be just the director of a simple task, they should try and expand a relationship
and communicate their thoughts to employees higher up in the company. Negotiating
effectively, mentoring team members, and mastering communication with
technology is also key to good organized communication.

Inductive Argument

Just this past week, Valentines Day arrived. I simply did not know what to get my boyfriend for valentines. 1.) I was going to give my boyfriend a cute little teddy bear, but it just did not seem enough. 2.) I heard that you could not go wrong when you give guys something that comes from the heart and something that’s nice as well. Nicky shoes classified as nice in my boyfriends perspective, 3.) so I decided to get him both the Nicky shoes and the teddy bear. My boyfriend most likely preferred to get both the Nicky’s shoes and the teddy bear instead of just the teddy bear. Part one and two are the dependent premises. Part three is the Conclusion. This is an inductive argument because the conclusion indicated that it was most likely true. In contrary to deductive arguments, which have conclusions unavoidably fallow the premises, inductive arguments only claim that the conclusion probably fallow the premises.

Decision Making

I always thought that all members of a team or group should show leadership of some sort. Everyone should have direction and influence. Shared leadership makes a group stand out and persevere throughout all of its tasks. All members should help accomplish the desired outcome of the team, make themselves credible with the team, and inspire and motivate their group members. Members should also know how to carry out a decision as team. To do this there is an eight step process. First a problem must be identified. Second, research should be conducted. Third, criteria and guidelines should be be established. Fourth, alternatives must be generated, somewhat like brainstorming solutions and possibilities. Fifth, these alternatives should be evaluated. Sixth, there must be a selection of the best alternatives. Seventh,the best solution should be submitted to a higher power or authority. Lastly, the results should be evaluated as a group. These eight steps result in great decision making.

Death Penalty

If the last statement were proven statistically, then this argument would be valid. Whether or not the two previous premises are dependent of each other, the conclusion would be true. If the last statement is just a random statement, then the two previous premises proves that the conclusion is invalid. Also, if one of the premises is false then that makes the conclusion false. In this case, since both the premises are true, the conclusion would also have to be true. Although this passage states that the death penalty is wrong in the eyes of Sister Helen, it does not state that usage of the death penalty is prohibited. Basically, the passage is saying that A and B are true, and that B could be false, so B can be true or false, (more likely false). In the end, the passage just states that Christians are more likely to support the death penalty, not necessarily, that it prohibits the usage of the death penalty. It can actually mean the contrary. If more Christians support the death penalty, less people want to prohibit the usage of it.

Sherlock Holmes

I think that Sherlock Holmes thought that the most difficult part about reasoning was separating the truth from the lies. If deductive reasoning is used, someone can eliminate answers that are not possible or are untrue. Holmes might have thought that it was easier for people to assume what others thought or said instead of looking at the real facts and evidence that was out there. If we all listened to rumors and did not think for ourselves the truth would never be uncovered. Human beings will always lie to cover up any story that affects them. If we do not question what we might think is true then the real truth might always stay hidden. In the case of the “murder” of the Horses trainer, Holmes used deductive reasoning to bring out an unthinkable truth. It turns out that instead of being murdered by someone else; the trainer was killed by his own horse. If Holmes had not thought of all the possible situations that could have happened but didn’t, he would have never gotten to the real truth.

Evaluating Arguments

In order to evaluate an argument you must determine the clarity, credibility, relevance, completeness and soundness of the argument. To understand the clarity of an argument you must ask yourself if the argument is clear and definite. To determine the credibility of an argument you must ask yourself if there is evidence that supports the argument made. In order to figure out if an argument has relevance to the subject you must understand how the stand of the subject flows into the conclusion of the argument. To make sure that the argument has completeness you must determine if every point is made and well argued. Lastly, in order to determine the soundness of an argument, one must determine if the grounds of the argument are true and if they support the closing statement. If these five steps are used, anyone can break down and diagram arguments, making it possible to evaluate them.

#2 Discussion

I remember once getting into an argument with my friends over my brother’s way of being. My brother seems to be a normal and active kid at first sight but, when you get to know him a little closer, it is obvious that there is something very special about him. I did many things for my brother that got in the way of many girls’ nights out with my friends. After a while, my friends argued that my brother could do things for himself and that he did not need much help, but they never realized how his mind worked things out in his head. As his sister, I knew how he thought, and I knew what he struggled with. I understood that my friends could not realize what my brother and I have gone through, so I was determined to make them realize why my brother needed so much care and attention. It took a couple months to finally show them proof and explained everything that my brother went through and needed, but in the end, I did not give in.

Obama's position on same sex marriage

Same sex marriage has been a very touchy and confusing position to understand for some time now. As time has passed, freedom of speech and religion has become an important part of an individual’s right in the United States. Many people believe that under their religion, God has created this world for the idealized man and women matrimony. At the same time, these people are torn between an individual’s freedom of choice and their own religious beliefs. Although Barak Obama is the president of the United States, he still deserves to have his own position on same sex marriage. Barak Obama and every other individual out there have their own reason for their stand in a position, as they should being in a free country. It very hard to always fully agree with one position, so exceptions are made in an individuals mind under different circumstances. This still means that even if Obama opposes same sex marriage, as the president of a free and democratic nation, he must support freedom of speech for the citizens of the United States.
In response to Nava and Dawidoff's argument, Obama might just support the cause but not involve his own views on the subject.