Random Sampling

Week 16, Post 3

For my last and final post for this class, I found random sampling from chapter 14 interesting. Random sampling is used in a lot of research however I did not know it can be used for critical thinking. According to Epstein, random sampling is, "a sample is chosen randomly if at every choice there is an equal chance for any one of the remaining members of the population to be picked." It is obvious that surveying every individual in the world is impossible, therefore using random sampling is the best option because any person can be picked. Selecting random people to conduct an experiment is not as easy as it seems. In the book it says that mathematicians prepare random numbers for the selection. Random sampling gives people a good reason to believe it is good sampling because it is not biased. An argument would be valid because its premises are not false due to the sample selection. 

favorite and least favorite

Week 16, Post 2

My favorite thing about the class is how it is online. I did not have to worry about being late to class. It was also very convenient for my hectic schedule. This class also took me out of my element, I never thought I would ever start a blog and actually write. It was a good experience because I learn to express my thoughts and allow others to read it. The 12 hour intervals made me stay on top of my work because I feared missing the deadline.

My least favorite thing about the class was the final project we did. When I first registered for the class, I didn't know we had to meet in person. My schedule is not as flexible as my other group mates so meeting was very difficult. For the last project, I had to skip two of my classes in order to complete the final project.

One thing this class can improve on is the projects assigned. Conflicting schedules made it difficult to gather every group member. Although, this class is critical thinking and it is about communication, busy schedules made meeting in person inconvenient.

What I learned

Week 16, Post 1

I learned numerous things in this class but the one thing I learned the most is to make any argument strong and valid. The concepts I learned in class are applied in my daily life now. Before starting this class, I thought every argument was valid if it sounded realistic. However, after learning the different claims and reasoning, I realized that the conclusion is only as good as the premises. I have always been told that there are always two sides for ever story so don't be quick to judge or make conclusions. When I am engaged in a conversation with my friend, I noticed that I am more aware of what he or she is saying. I find myself looking for valid points or if they are saying certain things due to appeal of emotions. Not only do I listen to others but I also make sure that I get my point across to others in a manner where it is reasonable and valid.

The Normal Conditions

Week 13, Post 3

A section in chapter 15 explains the importance of normal conditions used in arguments. Normal conditions are casual claims that are claims that are unstated but obvious and plausible but used to make arguments stronger and valid. In arguments, it is normal to leave certain things left out or unsaid especially if it would be an obvious statement. I found the use of normal condition claims to be an essential when presenting an argument because it allows us to keep our claims short and direct. It is not necessary to have additional apparent information because it is not the focal point of the argument and may cause confusion. Using normal condition claims would make the premises more likely to be vague or broad because statements that are evident can be endless. I think the claims that support the argument should be more concrete, focusing on the importance of the claims is needed.

Mission Critical Website

Week 13, Post 2

The Mission Critical Website is very useful especially because critical thinking is an aspect of everyday life. Critical thinking is important because it helps you logically evaluate and make arguments. The information provided from the website is almost similar to the book that we use for class. The site is divided into different sections making it easier to locate specific parts. Another reason why the site is useful is the exercises at the end of each section. Not only are there exercises but there are also quizzes that will allow us to gain additional knowledge in critical thinking. Examples are also discussed using explanations such as using certain words may alter the argument. Each of the topics is redirected to another page which contains all the necessary information in depth allowing readers to understand and comprehend better. When the links get redirected, the pages are less overwhelming because it solely focuses on one topic per page.

Cause and Effect Website

Week 13, Post 1

The cause and effect website was very useful because it narrowed each claim in details. The example of a casual argument the site used was about a bicyclist and two drivers. A bicyclist had to move into the traffic due to a truck that was parked in the bike lane illegally. To prevent from hitting the bicyclist, the car slams her brakes. The car following behind did not stop in time and rear ended the first car. The scenario was broken down into details including how each of the lawyers representing their clients can be defended and not be at fault. The site also included other forms of casual arguments such as reverse causation, post hoc reasoning, and common cause. Other information must also be considered; the argument may include a mixture of "difference" and "commodity" reasoning that can affect the case. Some useful tips were also provided on how casual arguments can be beneficial.

Judging Analogies

Week 12, Post 3

I found section C (Judging Analogies) in chapter 12, Reasoning by Analogy, extremely useful. In this section of the book, I learned that reasoning by analogy is used when the premises are not clear or vague. When premises are not apparent or understandable, making comparisons or similarities are needed to draw the conclusion. The examples the book used were exceedingly helpful, it made it easier for me to understand because the two premises that are being compared must have some sort of relativity. The examples in the book went in depth and explained why certain analogies will not work. It listed numerous similarities and differences such as how both firemen and soldiers wear uniforms and fight for the lives of others. It stated that it needs to find the similarities and the importance "in order to find a general principle that applies to both sides." It is also required important to find differences because the "general principle might not apply to one side." 

Reasoning of Analogy

Week 12, Post 2

One of the reasoning that I was having difficulty understanding was reasoning by analogy. At first, I did not understand how a comparison of two or more sides or things will make any premises in an argument true or valid. However, after doing some research, I came across a site that went in depth explaining what reasoning by analogy is and how it is presented in an argument. I learned that reasoning by analogy is a form of inductive reasoning and it has a logical relationship used to compare two similar things to each other. Looking at the similarities will show either related or unique characteristics. With the results after analyzing, we can determine if we made valid analytical comparisons. In an argument, it is not necessary for two things to be common for the premises or conclusion to be true. It is possible to have an argument plausible because one thing differs from the other.

http://www4.samford.edu/schools/netlaw/dh2/logic/analogy.htm

Different Types of Reasoning

Week 12, Post 1

1. Reasoning by Analogy
The process of using comparisons of two or more sides of reasoning to conclude the end result.

Riding a train is like riding on Bart.

2. Sign Reasoning
Two or more things in an argument that are relatively related or similar or an absence of one indicates the presence of another.

When there is a puddle in the middle of the room, there's a leak on the roof.

3. Casual Reasoning
There is a good reasoning to believe that there is an activity of some sort (cause) is followed by another activity (effect).

Drinking milk (cause) gives you strong bones (effect).

4. Reasoning by Criteria
In an argument, one usually analyze and make judgments before making the best decision.

White bed sheets are better than green sheets because it matches with more things.

5. Reasoning by Example
In an argument, an example is used as support for good reasoning.

Boys love toy trucks. My nephew only plays with his toy trucks.

6. Inductive
Inductive reasoning are based on previous observations or experiences that are used for premises in arguments.

Oprah starts at 4:00pm on Mondays through Fridays.
Therefore, Oprah will start at 4:00pm on Monday.

7. Deductive
If the premises are valid then the conclusion must also be true.

Last time someone changed the light bulb was a year ago.
The room is still dark after numerous attempts turning on and off the light switch.
Therefore, the light bulb burned out.

An appeal to Spite

Week 11, Post 3

In chapter 10, Too Much Emotions, the definition of an appeal to spite is the hope of revenge, is invariably rejected as bad by some people on moral grounds. An appeal to spite occurs when a person's honor is more important than lending a helping hand. Usually, one's action is not reciprocated and is acceptable in his or her own culture.

Alex: Are you moving out of the apartment by yourself?
Monica: Yes, can you help me move my furniture out of my apartment?
Alex: Yeah, of course.

Melanie: (discreetly) Why are you helping her move? She did not help you paint your walls last month.

The argument is Alex should not help Monica move her furniture because she did not help him paint. Her action was not reciprocated therefore, Alex does not have to help her as well. It was not even even exchange although Alex was not out for revenge, Melanie thought it was unfair. The premise is Alex should not help anyone who is not willing to help him out.

Appeal to Fear

Week 11, Post 2

3. Find an advertisement that uses an appeal to fear. Is it a good argument?

The advertisement wants to prevent teenage girls from getting pregnancy at a young age. I think this is a good argument because the text below the three female figures is alarming. The text presents the statistics reading that currently in the United States 1 in 3 teenage girls will get pregnant by the age of 19 which is considered high. The picture shows 3 female figures and one of them is shaded in a light pink allowing the viewers to see the ratio. This advertisement shows appeal to fear because it wants to create awareness and increase an alarm of terror. This picture wanted to scare girls so they will either be abstinent or be careful an use protection. Imagining it on a bigger scale, if there were 300 teenage girls, out of that 100 of them are pregnant. Most of them will just graduate high school and are not ready to take care of herself let alone another human being.   

Appeals to Emotion

Week 11, Post 1

In an argument, an appeal to emotion is when a premise is expressing what a person should believe or feel in a certain way.

A feel-good argument appeals to me the most because it can be applied to all types of situations we go through in our lives. A feel-good argument occurs when we want to feel good about ourselves. There is a desire to see the positivity within ourselves. We want to be convinced that there is self-importance and how we perceive our own self has more value and respect.


An example of a feel-good argument is:
Paul is on a diet, part of his diet plan is to go on a daily run every morning and to eat healthy. Eating healthy means no sugar and no dark meat. However, one day after his jog, Paul wanted to eat a donut and said, "I deserve a donut, I have been following his diet for a while and one donut won't hurt."

Reasoning in a Chain and the Slippery Slope

Week 9, Post 3

While reading the book, I stumbled upon "reasoning in a chain and the slipper slope," which is located in chapter 6 (Compound Claims) of the book. The definition of a slippery slope argument provided by the book says, "A slippery slope argument is a bad argument that uses a chain of conditionals, at least one of which is false or dubious." I didn't quite understand how one simple premise could turn an argument into a slippery slope. However, after researching online, I came across a website that explains the slippery slope argument in depth.

http://www.garlikov.com/philosophy/slope.htm

I learned that if the guidelines are not followed, an argument with a false premise turns into a slippery slope. If one premise is not true, then the whole argument is useless and invalid. When one argument is false then it becomes a chain reaction occurs because the other premises are also invalid and it goes down a slippery slope. The "camel's nose in the tent," the "give and inch," the "crack in the foundation" are also names for the "slippery slope" argument.

Major Course Assignment

Week 9, Post 2

Assignment #1, Critical Thinking in News and Politics," was very useful because it allowed us to use the materials we learned in this class and apply it to a real article. Each member was assigned a part in the paper. Doing so, I only focused on my assigned section which made it easier for me to fully understand what I had to do. I thought that by breaking down each component of the essay, it showed us how we were able to focus on the premises and the conclusion of the argument in the article. My role in assignment #1 was to find a "description" and define the difference between an argument and the description in the article. After concentrating on my part of the assignment, it gave me a better understanding of what occurs in articles and how the author writes can persuade the readers. I was able to see the difference between what is factual and what a premise is.

General Claims and Their Contradictories & Some Valid and Invalid Forms

Week 9, Post 1

General claims lack a definite idea about all of part of a collection. A contradictory of a claim is the opposite truth of a claim. Using words such as "all" and "some," can change the meaning of a general claim to its contradictory claim.

In chapter 8, it states:
All means "Every single one, no exceptions" or "Every single one, and there is at least one."
Some means "At least one" or "At least one, but not all."

Claim:
All college students study for midterms.
Contradictory:
Some college students don't study for midterms.

Although an argument may sound good, it may not be in a valid form. Writing an argument directly, it is more likely to be a stronger argument. However, writing an argument backwards can make the argument weak or even invalid because it overlooks possibilities.

Direct way of reasoning with "all":
All dancers can count beats.
Juan is a dancer.
Therefore, Juan can count beats.

Arguing backwards with "all":
All dancers can count beats.
Juan can count beats.
Therefore, Juan is a dancer.

Juan does not have to be a dancer to count beats, he can be a musician. Arguing backwards limited the possibilities making the argument weak and invalid.

False Dilemmas

Week 7, Post 3

In the book, Critical Thinking, the definition of a false dilemma is a bad usage of "or" in a claim is false or implausible to exclude possibilities. Although the claims of the argument are valid, it may not be a good.  Using "or" only limits the possibilities one can have in an argument; it excludes any other opportunities or alternatives.

I found this section in the book extremely helpful because it was often said that in an argument only if the premises are true it is unlikely that the conclusion is false. However, even though the premises are true in a false dilemma, it is not the complete truth because using "or" makes it seem that the argument is narrowed with limited options. However, I feel that using false dilemmas get the message across to others more and I think it is quite common. I am positive that everyone has used a false dilemma in their lifetime as least once. I know I have used this tactic before, I just did not know there was a name for it until now.

Refuting an Argument

Week 7, Post 2

So far the book had been teaching us how to make the best strong, valid arguments but never how to refute back. There are two ways to refute; either directly or indirectly. We also learned how to repair arguments however when an argument is needs to be fixed, we can use it to our advantage. Instead of repairing the argument, we can follow the following guidelines to refute:

Direct ways of refuting an argument
1. Show that at least one of the premises is dubious.
2. Show that the argument isn't valid or strong.
3. Show that the conclusion is false.

Dan says mosquito repellents are a waste of money and it does not work. The only time Dan does not get a mosquito bite when he goes camping is during his swim in the lake. Therefore, to save money and keep mosquitoes away from camp sites are to camp near a lake.

Directly: Rena can argue back by saying that repellents work if you use it all over your body and Dan only put it on his arms and got bit by a mosquito on his leg.

Indirectly: Rena does not refute back but instead shows Dan that his conclusion is false. Mosquitoes lay their eggs in water which means there are actually more mosquitoes at campsites near lakes or ponds. 

Compound Claims

Week 7, Post 1

According to the Epstein, two or more claims that are come together as one claim is a compound claim.
To make a compound claim by combining two different claims with words such as "or," and "and." A claim that connects the two is called alternatives. A contradictory of a claim contains an "opposite truth-value" in any possible situation. A negation of a claim is another way of contradictory by using words like "not".

For breakfast, Paul will eat cereal with milk or he will eat dry cereal.

Using an alternative claim, the word "or" was used for two independent claims to come together.

Claim 1: Paul will eat cereal with milk.
Claim 2: Paul will eat dry cereal.

Both of the claims were not confusing because both of the premises are not false and contradicting. The compound claim is not an argument because it is not a cause and effect situation with words like "because." By creating one compound with claim 1 and claim 2, it is simpler and it makes the topic of the argument clear.

Inferring and Implying

Week 6, Post 3

Inferring is a person decides to choose a claim and make that claim the conclusion of the argument.

Implying occurs when a person decides to not declare what the conclusion is but instead implies conclusion in the argument.

I thought chapter 5, part E in the book, "Inferring and Implying" was very useful. The two definitions are very different and often times I get it confused. After reading this section in the book, I got a better understanding when someone infers or implies the premises and conclusion in and argument. When someone infers a claim, he or she is jumping into conclusions by taking a claim and turning it into a conclusion. Some arguments are flawed, therefore assuming a premise as a conclusion occurs. When the conclusion is implied, the argument is obvious and stating the conclusion is not needed. The argument is strong and valid enough that it is not necessary to give the conclusion because it is evident.

Advertisement on Internet

Week 6, Post 2

Feeling unlucky with the ladies? Well, apparently VO5 hair products can change that. By applying one simple application, it can boost your confidence, your self-esteem up, and your hair!

 However, it is not guaranteed that you would be as fortunate as the guy in the picture. Advertisements contains claims that are relevant to the audience they are targeting with an open ended conclusion that allows the audience to see the end result as they please. The two page advertisement contains blatantly sexual messages that may sell the products.

When evaluating the advertisement, there can only be three possible choices to either believe the claim or not to believe it.

1. Accept the claim as true.
2. Reject the claim as false.
3. Suspend judgment.

Most of the time, we use our own judgments and our own personal experiences to decide. Perhaps, a trusty friend or someone of higher authority is convinced the product works. Reliable internet sources may also play a part whether to accept, reject, or suspend the claim.

Repairing Arguments

Week 6, Post 1

When an argument needs repairing, in chapter 4 of the book it says often times it lacks an unstated premise or an unstated conclusion. In order to repair an argument, The Guide to Repairing Arguments providing some guidelines to follow:

1. The argument becomes stronger or valid.
2. The premise is plausible and would seem plausible to the other person.
3. The premise is more plausible than the conclusion.
If the argument is then valid or strong, we may delete a premise if doing so doesn't make the argument worse.


Jane is a ballerina. So, Jane is a good dancer.

The conclusion is Jane is a good dancer. However, there is nothing to support it but with the given information that she is a ballerina. To repair the argument another premise is needed to make the argument stronger and valid.

Jane is a ballerina. Jane has been practicing 3 hours of ballet everyday for 15 years. So, Jane is a good dancer.

Without another premises we can only assume other people know what we are discussing. When one more premise is added in the argument, we made the argument valid. Both the premises are plausible and it is more plausible than the conclusion. Jane is a dancer, she practices for 3 hours a day which is believable. Both of the premises lead up to the conclusion that she is a good dancer.

Structural Fallacies

After reading Structural Fallacies in chapter 11, I learned that misleading and deceiving premises are the only reasons there are bad arguments. Other causes that can lead to any bad arguments is the way an argument is structured and organized.  The examples in the book between fallacy type and similar type of valid or strong argument were extremely helpful. I got a better understanding because it had comparison of the two side by side giving me a better view of how different it is. The explanation for the fallacy type occurs when sequences are rotated like "affirming the consequent" or saying one thing but later taking back what had been said which is "denying the antecedent." However, similar type of valid or strong arguments shows the correct way of how the premises and conclusion are supposed to be arranged. I now know that I have to be aware of I arrange and construct the premises and conclusion otherwise my arguments would be considered fallacy.

Content Fallacies

Week 4, Post 2

A fallacy argument occurs when a false, deceiving, or misleading premise has been made. From the book, "Critical Thinking," a form of a fallacy argument is:

Bad appeal to common belief {or practice)
If (almost) everyone else (in this group) believes it (or does it), then it's true (good to do).

"Bad appeal to common belief" is almost like falling for peer pressure. It is also like "monkey see, monkey do."  Often times, when there is an amount of people believing it, then it seems like whatever it is has to be real. My friends in college drink at least a cup of coffee a day. I don't drink coffee and I never thought about how it would affect me if I did start drinking it. "I need a cup of coffee, I'm falling asleep in class," is what my friend would always say to me. One day, I felt like I did not have enough energy to pay attention in class so my friend told me to get a cup of coffee to stay alert. I thought that since coffee keeps her and my other college friends awake, it would help me as well. After drinking the cup of coffee, not only was I still tired but I also had an upset stomach. I realized that coffee does not work for me and my body does not like the caffeine. What works for others may not work for me and just because everyone else does it, it may not be the best.

Structure of Arguments

Week 4, Post 1

On page 235, in the Exercises for Structure of Arguments, I chose the third argument to analyze.

Las Vegas has too many people. 1 There's not enough water in the desert to support more than a million people. 2 And the infrastructure of the city can't handle more than a million: The streets are overcrowded, and traffic is always congested; 3 the schools are overcrowded, and new ones can't be built fast enough. 4 We should stop migration to the city by tough zoning laws in the city and county. 5

Argument! Yes, Las Vegas is too populated.

Conclusion: Migration to the city and county should be stopped with laws.

Additional premises needed? If Las Vegas has a numerous amount of people, there is not enough water for more than a million people. If the streets are overcrowded and traffic is congested then a law should stop migration to the city.

Identify any subargument: Claims 2 and 4 are independent and both support 5.

Good argument! Yes, the premises are plausible and the argument is valid. It has also provided descriptive claims which supports the conclusion.

I found this exercise to be useful because it allowed me to break apart the argument into different claims and look at each claim individual. I was able to detect which ones were independent claims from the ones that were too vague to be independent. I was also able to differentiate the premises, subarguments, and conclusion from one another through this exercise. I got a better understanding of how arguments should be analyzed and what I need to look for and include in arguments.    

Argument in Outline Form

Week 3, Post 3

I found it interesting that simple, everyday arguments can be planned out and written. Something useful that caught my attention when I was reading Writing Lesson 3 in the chapter titled What is a Good Argument? was making a pros and cons list. It is challenging to come up with arguments even though it may happen on a daily basis. The pros and cons list allows me to see how I can improve and make my arguments stronger or how it can potentially make it weaker as well. While doing this exercise, it is not a necessity to make the argument sound "pretty" as the book says. Instead, write an argument that is reasonable and unambiguous. A weak argument usually is not supported well, therefore the premises and conclusion must be thought out thoroughly. Writing a page long full of arguments is difficult but with as long as the guidelines are followed, simple remarks can develop into useful arguments.

Strong vs. Valid Arguments

Week 3, Post 2

There is a difference between a strong argument and a valid argument. What makes an argument strong or valid is the conclusion; the conclusion needs to be supported by the premises. In the book, "Critical Thinking," Richard Epstein mentioned that both a strong and valid argument does not depend on:

1. Whether the premises are true.
2. Whether we know the premises are true.
3. Whether the person making the argument thinks the argument is valid or strong.

Popcorn is available at every movie theater my friends and I go to. Therefore, every movie theater serves popcorn.

Both the premise and the conclusion are true making this an example of a strong argument. Although there is a possibility that either or both the premise and the conclusion is false, it is slim when the argument is less questionable. The statements are specific which is more likely believed to be true.

 Popcorn is at the movie theaters. Therefore, every movie theater serves popcorn.

Even though the conclusion is the same conclusion as the example for the strong argument, the premise is slightly vague. Both the premise and the conclusion can be questioned whether it is true or false. The possibility of having a a false premise or conclusion is higher because it is not as detailed or supported. Because it is unlikely to be false, this is an example of a valid argument.

Test for an Argument

Week 3, Post 1

According to Richard Epstein, author of "Critical Thinking," a good argument must include a claim that is reasonable in order for the outcome to be true. In addition to that, he also mentioned that having a good argument must pass at least one of the three following consisting of:

1. The premises are plausible.
2. The premises are more plausible than the conclusion.
3. The argument is valid or strong.

Carlos loves rescuing animals
People with more than 30 pets rescue animals.
So, Carlos has more than 30 pets.

The argument, "Carlos loves rescuing animals" is possible therefore it is valid. Although the argument is valid because it is true granted test 3 it does not make a strong argument due to the second premise that violates test 1 and 2. The conclusion is true, however based on the second statement that is false the argument is no longer plausible.

If the second premise is changed to, "People with more than 30 pets usually like to rescue animals" then it would be considered a reasonable argument because it is not common that families own more than 30 pets. The claim states, "usually like" which makes the argument valid because it is possibly true. Changing the second premise passes the tests and not make the argument questionable.

Prescriptive Claims, Descriptive Claims, & Value Judgements

Week 2, Post 3

A prescriptive claim is more of a suggestion that something ought to be, or should be a certain way.

I know my parents want the absolute greatest things for me, whether it is materialistic items or education. so my parents constantly make suggestions like, "You should take summer classes because you don't want to lost the school mode" or "You don't want to get that shirt because after a couple of washes it will get ruined." These statements are examples of what prescription claims are.

A descriptive claim is a specific statement that depicts something actual.

Sentences like "San Jose State University is a college" and "Betty's hair color is strawberry blond" are considered a descriptive claims because what is said is actually true.

Value judgment is certain comments that are opinionated that can be considered prescriptive claims.

I think every individual make value judgments on a daily basis because our minds are constantly running with thoughts without acknowledging it. Certain comments such as, "IHOP serves the best pancakes" or "The worst color to wear is blue" are value judgment because words like "best" or "worst" are used.

Vague/ Ambiguous Sentence

Week 2, Post 2

Earlier today, a friend of mine stopped by my house to pick up some Chemistry material that I borrowed from him. He started telling me about his first semester at UC Berkeley and the cost of living in the dormitory is about $1,300 each month so he preferred to commute. He also mentioned that he works two jobs while going to school. Then he says, "Man, the commute everyday is so far." I just nodded my head but I did not know exactly what his definition of far was or where he was commuting to. My friend's remark is considered vague because he did not state a specific location nor did he tell me what he meant by far. Far could be 5 minutes away, more or less an hour away, he was unclear which leaves me clueless as to what "far" is to him. Far can also be interpreted by distance, how many miles or the number of steps it took him to walk. He tells me he commutes but was he traveling to school or to either of his jobs. My friend's statement is clearly ambiguous, it would have been helpful if he specified exactly where the far commute is. A broad statement like his only makes me ponder.

Subjective & Objective Claims

Week 2, Post 1

A subjective claim is a statement that is either true or false based on a person's opinions, values, or beliefs.

The other day, I was at a barbecue picnic with my cousins and friends in San Mateo. One of my cousins who is from San Francisco said, "San Francisco is the best city to live in." My cousin's comment is due to being accustomed to the living conditions in San Francisco. Her statement is an example of subjective claim because whether it was true or not depended on her point of view.

An objective claim is a statement that does not base on a person's opinions, values, or beliefs whether it is true or not.

My friend wanted to buy a new dress for an upcoming wedding she was going to attend. She decided to buy it online which can be a burden because she will not be able to try it on to see if it fits. She asked me what size she should get and I told her to measure herself for the best fit. After doing so, she tells me that according to the online measurements, she is a size small. Whether it is true of false, an objective claim does not depend on a person's perspective like my friend's dress size.

Introduction

Hello everyone,

I am in my third year here at San Jose State University. I am currently majoring in Biology, Systems Physiology, minoring in Chemistry. This is my first time taking an online class and I don't have a lot of experiences with communication. I hope to gain knowledge, experience, and improve in communication and writing through this class.

An interesting thing is that I chose my blog name from using a blog name generator.