Sexual Harassment

In Chapter 4 of O’Hair’s textbook sexual harassment is discussed. Sexual harassment is defined by the text as unwelcome sexual advances or overtures and requests for sexual favors. I think sexual harassment is an important topic to be aware of throughout our lives. It is something that is taking place more than statistics actually know because it so often goes unreported, because the victim doesn’t want to face the person sexually harassing them. Often times the reason is that they feel they will loose their job, won’t be taken seriously or they think it is their fault. Women tend to be the majority of the victims of sexual harassment and as the text also points out it’s probably because of the different method of communication men and women have. Men aren’t as expressive when communicating as women are. Women are known to use smiles, eye contact and physical touch when they are communicating more than men are. And this can cause misunderstandings between female and male coworkers. If we better understand the differences between the way males and females communicate it could help lessen the number of sexual harassment cases each year.

Content Fallacies: Slippery Slope

How I understand Slippery Slope is in the form of an algebra equation almost, X+Y=Z. If X happens then Y will happen, which will force Z to happen. Someone will often use this argument to try an convince others why a specific event shouldn’t happen because if it does it will ensure that another event that people don’t want to happen will happen. The reasoning that happens is in a chain of events, but what the argument lacks is reasoning of why the final event inevitability will happen. There isn’t evidence provided to back up the argument they are presenting. An example of a Slippery Slope argument that I think most of us being students can relate to is: We have to put a stop to our school increasing our tuition. If we don’t the next thing you know, we will be paying $50,000 a semester to attend college. Yes, it is true that tuition is increasing steadily it seems and that inevitably we will being paying more and more to attend college, but it is highly unlikely that out of no where we will be paying $50,000 a semester.

Analyzing the Structure of Arguments

Question #4 (numbered claims): When Dr. E was walking her dogs last night they started to chase something 1. It wasn’t a skunk 2. The dogs could catch a skunk if they were to chase it a. The dogs would stink if they caught a skunk b. The dogs didn’t stink c.
Argument? Yes, it is an argument.
Conclusion: It wasn’t a skunk. (2)
Additional premises needed? Not really, what wasn’t said is common sense. The unstated premises that are common sense are: If a skunk feels threatened, which it would if being chased by two dogs it would spray them. Spraying them is the skunk’s method of defense.
Good argument: Yes, this is an example of a good argument.

I found this exercise to be helpful in the since that I am a firm believer in practice makes perfect. I have found over my years of school and homework that I learn the best from application and hands on work. So by taking what I read if the previous pages of this part of the textbook and then applying it I found myself better understanding how to analyze the structure of an argument and determine if it is a good argument or if it’s not what is needed to make it a good argument. So all in all, the exercise was helpful.

What is Leadership?

The definition that the book presents of leadership is "the exercise of interpersonal influence toward the attainment of goals" (0'Hair, p32). In my opinion the definition of leadership is pretty vague, but I think there is a reason for this. Leaders can be found in all parts of our society and world and take many shapes and forms therefore you cannot have a detailed definition of leadership because it changes depending on what type of leader you are talking about. Some examples of the different types of leaders are: the leader of a household (an adult or parent), of a school (the principal), of the office (manager or owner), of the state (the governor), of the military (the general), and of the U.S. (the president). These are just a few examples of different types of leaders, but looking at these examples it is easy for me to understand why there are four types of leadership. Each type of has traits that benefit and hinder them in different situations. For example lets look at the military general; he has to make quick decisions with minimal input or discussion from others to be effective in times of war and to resolve conflicts. The general uses the authoritarian leadership style to lead the military. Authoritarian leadership makes sense for the general to use because most of his decisions have to be made quickly and doesn’t have time to discussion his decisions with others in the military. But take the governor his style is participative leadership; he opens problems up for discussion, takes inputs from other members of the state, and works together with other members equally to make decisions. Although his opinion ways more he has to be sure to be a participative leader because he is an elected official and his job security depends on the happiness of the citizens of his state. If they aren’t when it is election time he could not be re-elected.

Tests for an Argument to be Good

My example argument: I like my mom’s cooking. My friends and family like my mom’s cooking. Everyone I know likes my mom’s cooking. Using the three tests for an argument to be good I am going to analyze my argument. The first test is, is the premise plausible? Yes, it is true that I personally like my mom’s cooking and my friends and family like it as well. The premise is more plausible than the conclusion is for the reason that it is near impossible that everyone I know, from my teachers, to coworkers to fellow classmates (to just name a few) has tried my mom’s cooking. All though it is possible that if these people had a chance they to would like my mom’s cooking doesn’t make the conclusion of my argument true. The second test, are the premises more plausible than the conclusion? Yes the premises are more plausible than the conclusion. As I have stated before it is almost impossible for everyone I know to have tried my mom’s cooking. Unless I carried around samples of my mom’s cooking and had very single person I met try it there is very few ways that everyone I know to try my mom’s cooking. And with our technology world it makes that method even more unlikely to work. I can’t feed Ms. Perez a sample of my mom’s cooking through a blog post, making my premises that my friends and family and myself like my mom’s cooking more plausible than the conclusion that everyone I know. The third test is, is the argument valid or strong? My argument is a weak argument, because my premises don’t include the majority of the people I know, classmates, coworkers, superiors, acquaintances I have from the gym, my favorite restaurant, and through my friends. So, everyone to know my mom does have amazing cooking skills :)

Strong vs Valid Arguments

A valid argument is an argument that’s conclusion is followed logically from the truth of the premises the argument has. A valid argument cannot have a false conclusion with premises that are true. However, just because an argument is valid doesn’t mean its conclusion will be true. The premises (doesn’t have to be all of them can just be one) can be false leading to a false conclusion. An example of a valid argument is Brandon has a degree from San Jose State University. Therefore, Brandon went to college at San Jose State University. A strong argument is an invalid argument and is an argument that is likely impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion of the argument to be false. The same is for the opposite. A strong argument is an argument that is likely impossible for the premises to be false and the conclusion to be true. An example of a strong argument is: When I visited Brandon at work I saw a diploma from San Jose State University on his office wall. Therefore, Brandon got his degree from San Jose State University.

VAGUE & AMBIGUOUS

Vague sentences usually use the words like “this,” “it,” or “which” for example that don’t have any reference to a specific word or phrase, instead is referring to a whole situation. We are accustomed to vague statements in verbal conversations and these statements are often unnoticed by the recipients and senders. However, vague statements can be very confusing when reading it in writing. I often find it interesting how the bad habits and laziness we have grown into in our conversations has found its way into our writing. From my experience in communicating through public relations it has become such a norm to use it in day-to-day conversation; sometimes the author doesn’t realize they have snuck into their work. An example of a vague sentence that I have encountered lately is a phrase that has become a norm for the American culture. The phrase is the Nike slogan “just do it.” When this slogan came out years ago, Nike had to make sure to explain the statement. Nike had to make sure to give the word “it” implied context with the image in the ad. “Just do it” is a very vague sentence, if someone read this and was unfamiliar with the Nike brand they would be very confused and unsure of what exactly they were just supposed to do.

A Good Group

Some of the key points that make up a good group are members of the group must be able to work together well, ideas should be in sync with each member, the group must be able to resolve any conflicts that arise, the group should have group rules established, and as a whole and individually have good behavior together. When reading chapter 2 in the Small Group Comm book a metaphor of what a good group is came to my mind; a household family. I'm not talking about my family or anyone else's family specifically I am just talking about the general concept of a household family that I believe in. In order for a house to function smoothly there are needs to be order or rules established for example who's in charge of paying the bills, who takes out the garbage and who cleans. A family tends to be in sync with each other, they have the same values and because of that get along for the most part. Although in any household problems and conflicts do arise, but part of being a family is working through the problems and conflicts that arise. Although groups in comm classes are not families or even households that can use that as an example of how to function well together. Rules need to be established, who is gonna do what part of the assignment, when will we be meeting and what happens if a member does not do there part.

OBJECTIVE AND SUBJECTIVE CLAIMS

Objective claims are ones that can be either proven true or false, they are factual statements. Objective claims do not always have to be true they can be false; as long as they concern factual matters they are objective. Objective claims must use criteria and methods that both exist and are expected by the majority to determine if they are true or false. Subjective claims are statements/claims that express a belief, opinion, value, feelings, judgments or preference that a person or a group may have, they are not factual statements that can be verified. Subjective claims cannot be proven true nor can they be proven false, right or wrong by any general method.
An example of an objective claim that I have recently encountered is from an online news article I read this morning about a bombing that took place in South Carolina and what the authorities had to say about it. The article’s title, “Bomb blows up unoccupied truck in SC neighborhood” is the objective claim. The title is a fact that can be proven through policy records and investigation. There is a general method for determining whether something is a truly a bomb or not. A bomb is defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary as an explosive device fused to detonate under specified conditions. In addition, the state in which the incident happened can be tested as well as if the truck was unoccupied or not.
An example of a subjective claim that I have recently encountered is from over the weekend when I listened to my dad and brother discussed the 2010 Super Bowl. My brother said, “Peyton Manning is the best quarterback in the NFL right now.” This statement is an opinion; you can’t prove it right or wrong (it’s not a factual statement). There may be people that agree with what my brother said and there also may be people that strongly disagree with what he said. However, even if someone disagrees with his statement he still has a right to say it.