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.
I agree with you that the cause and effect website was useful. The fact that the website was able to narrow down each type of claim by example allowed for me to see the concepts thoroughly and individually which helped me out a lot. I also liked that the website showed that some arguments are often a mixture of difference and commodity reasoning, as you mentioned in your post. I was initially unsure about the example the website gave using the bicycle and the car accident – and even though you wrote about the same example within this post, I did feel that your wording of the same example made more sense than the original example. So thanks for that. :]
ReplyDelete