Showing posts with label fallacy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fallacy. Show all posts

Friday, June 1, 2018

PowerPoint part 4: Death by PowerPoint


          I've been going over some notes, or suggestions rather, on how to make for an interesting PowerPoint: no more than 20 minutes for entire presentation and no more than 10 slides.  Hey, instructors, I guess this doesn't apply to you then, does it?  It should.
          I changed my slide show.  Kept half with clips and the others were boring but included the premises and conclusions . . . blah, blah, blah . . .

"What is Daylight Saving Time and why do we have it?  This country started practicing DST during Ward War I to conserve on energy. This helped to cut down the cost of coal for heating and candlelight (History, 2012).  But what has happened to us over a century later?  Many people have a problem with changing their sleep patterns. 

"Researchers have found several people complaining of headaches.  One study found a 10% increase in heart attacks on the Monday and Tuesday following the Sunday in which people “spring ahead”. There has also been an 8% increase in strokes (Strickland, 2018).  Productivity among employees seems to go down.  This is what many of us look and feel like when we are trying to adjust to the time differences (Top 3, 2018).

should have changed last premises to say: Adjusting the clock every six months


is not good for sleeping patterns but  kept for example in the 3rd slide

"We have 24 hours in each day.  Setting the clocks ahead seems like an attempt to cheat us out of an hour.  So that first Sunday feels like only  23 hours.  But when we set our clocks back in the fall, we have a Sunday with 25?  That extra hour does not make up for lack of sleep during daylight.  It doesn't make up for ailing health (Feltman, 2015).   If someone were to invent a way to take that extra hour of sunlight and apply it to the winter, then I would be impressed.  But the hours of daylight that we have in the summer do not carry over to the hours of darkness that we have in the winter.  The amount of daylight is always the same whether the clock reads 6:00 in the morning or if it reads 5:00.  We need to keep the hours of the clock consistent to what our bodies believe (Dunning, 2009).



"Why wouldn’t we want to keep DST?  One reason would be to promote safety. Children on their way to school can see be seen easier which cuts down on the number of pedestrian accidents which take place during darker hours (Holodny, 2015).  There are fewer traffic accidents as drivers are able to better notice one another (Top 3, 2018). And there is less crime. And why would crime rates be down? People driving home during daylight hours may discourage perpetrators as they will be easier to recognize.   More people outside accounts for more witnesses (Holodny, 2015). It is said that extra hour of sunshine promotes positive activity (Feltman, 2015).  Perhaps the criminals enjoy the light also and would rather be out enjoying the sunshine than committing crimes.  Just a thought.


"There are statistics given on each side of the argument.  There are also fallacies which may seem illogical or unsound to one’s reasoning (Bearup, 2015)  Here, I have given two examples, and hopefully, I have attached the correct name to each.  The con premises refers to adjusting the clock.  Of course, the very notion of  “adjusting one’s clock” by itself does not make us unhealthy; rather the constant cycle of interrupting sleeping patterns is what would account for unhealthiness. 

referenced PRO fallacy, but used my own fallacy to explain the CON
I still don't know the accuracy of providing the correct name of fallacies

"For the pro, I chose the phrase about crime:   Since more crime is committed in the darkness, daylight savings will provide more light in which crime will not be committed.  The keywords here are “might” and “ probably”. Statistics have shown that more crime takes place in the summer than in the winter (Dahl, 2012).  I have noticed that both sides give similar reasons for why we should or shouldn’t have DST.  Is it a fallacy to say that each side is correct? Let me post another argument for you.


"From the time I was in elementary school I had always been told that DST was an agriculture thing.  Everybody in the entire world had to adjust their clocks so that farmers could get their work done - or so I believed.  It was not until I started doing research for this project that I learned that farmers were opposed to DST.  Just as with our bodies unable to adjust to the time difference, cows don't adjust their bodies according to the time on the clock. 

note each sentence, crossout, and clip were brought in one at a time

"They will milk when they are ready to produce.  That extra hour of sunlight isn't going to change that.  And because Bessie and friends won't produce at the given time, milk does not leave the farm until an hour later causing a chain reaction of one-hour delays for all other businesses involved (Feltman, 2015).  But not all farmers are dairy farmers.  What about the farmers that rely on crops? Crops can be picked right after the sun has dried the dew.  Moving and operating equipment seems like it would be easier to do in sunlight.  Again, safety reasons (Dunning, 2009)"

            I had noticed that I had given a reference that was not accurate.  I searched through my notes for the correct reference, but could not locate the article and so typed in some keywords and found even more references and statistics to prove why the crime rate was higher during daylight - again, no statistics found to back up the pro side.  In fact, the only statistic I could find attached to the pro was saving 2% - 4% on electric and/or gas, with the con side saying the spending had raised 2% - 4%.  Seriously?  The amount is NOT worth my LOSING sleep and RISKING health.  Come on!

            I did not look up what the ratio of accidents in the summer are compared to the "darkness" but had heard this Memorial Day Weekend that it was one of the deadliest times for traveling on the road.  Wow.  Memorial Day takes place during DST.  Did the "pro" seekers take that into account when they said daylight promotes safety?  I think most of the "pro" arguments are fallacies (but then again it's probably a fallacy on my part to write it that way.)

             One slide that I would have liked to do for fun - which was really not pertinent to the slide presentation, but an interesting fact about DST.  George Vernon Hudson was a scientist from New Zealand who had proposed the idea of DST so that he could study bugs.  His proposal was for a two hour set back.  Can you imagine?  The idea of two-hour change every six months beats William Willett's (a British builder) idea of having to adjust the clocks twenty minutes for each Sunday of a specific month.  That seems like a lot of work!  On the other hand, it might be easier for us to adjust our sleeping hours by twenty minutes as opposed to an hour or two.

            I would have brought in my slides and pictures one at a time concluding that all of our lives may be upset because some guy wanted to look at bugs.




            I incorporated my slide of Utah and Arizona  - though not in it's entirety.  The mapping of the standard/daylight/standard may not be accurate, but it still proved my point. Roland said I shouldn't have that many clips on one slide anyway.  But it was to illustrate the confusion.

"Daylight saving upsets the farmers, Amtrax, the airlines, sleeping patterns.  I mean take a look at this:  don’t forget to set your clocks one hour ahead at 2 a.m.  What???? I have to set my clock to remind me to set the clock and lose more sleep!  Is that confusing?  Is there too much activity going on for just one slide?  Your eyes don’t know where to focus?  Maybe you have a headache?  This is how I feel about daylight saving time.  And it’s not just me.  I know many people who feel the same way."

each of these clips would have been brought in one at a time before the entire screen was cluttered


good sources for daylight policy found here and here along with all my other references from all slides (gosh, aren't you thrilled?)












Wednesday, September 28, 2016

Two more assignments


I have had a couple of things wander in and out of my mind - but I haven't connected my thoughts.  I have an assignment in my management class to write up a 500-word essay on leadership answering three specific questions about Gary Kelly, CEO of Southwest Airlines.  I've brainstormed my ideas, but haven't formed any sentences - which I should be doing instead of posting to my blog, but somehow feel the need to post something.  So here it goes.

I have already posted two of my assignments from the philosophy class that I took.   Six stages of critical thinking found here and an outline of my power point Sometimes . . . Dreams Happen . .  found found here


In this post, I will share the two assignment from the other two weeks of class.

The first one is Making Emotions a Part of Digital Technology written  in response to this video.



Making Emotions a Part of Digital Technology

                Technology has affected our communication in several ways.  We have gone from backyard visits and using card catalogs at the local library to relying on electronic devices for everything. We've been encouraged to go to school online, shop online, work from home (online) and correspond with one another electronically.  We don't even have to leave the house anymore.  It almost seems as though human contact is no longer encouraged.  Yet there are those who seek to "humanize technology"
                I found myself smiling through the majority of the Ted Talk video featuring Rana El Kaliouby.  I genuinely admire the passion she shared for this digital emotion reading product which has been named "Affectivia".  I'd like to share some things that were discussed in the video and some of my own view points and "emotions". Three specific points come to mind.
                The first point I would like to make is that emotion-recognition technology is a great tool to have for those who are dealing with children or others who may have autism.  Our human minds don't always grasp what emotion is being expressed, but emotion-recognition technology has programmed twelve billion emotion data points.  This makes it sound as if this technology is more accurate than any human.
                Rana el Kaliouby says,This would focus on pragmatic training, helping these kids understand the meaning of different facial expressions and how to express their own.” (Matheson, 2014)
                My second point is that this technology would benefit those that are going into marketing and graphic design.  This would enable the advertiser to understand the emotions of potential clients who may or may not use said product as it might give instant feedback of how the consumer may feel about said product.
                The third point I would like to make is that emotion-recognition technology in the workplace may assist with quality control. Employers would be able to know when their employees are really working and earning their pay or if their employees are goofing off and need to be dealt with. Perhaps employees will be able to work more effectively with humanistic technology.
                As a personal use, el Kaliouby jokes (or perhaps she was being serious) about app being applied to all appliances.  One example that she used was having the refrigerator recognizing stress.  Her suggestion was that the fridge would automatically lock so that the person who is stressed doesn't binge.  What if the emotionally stressed person becomes angry and breaks the fridge or smashes the computer because of humanistic emotional response?  While there are many positive aspects to this technology, I am not 100% in favor of it.
                Let me give you the example of the talking elevator doors.  Elevators on cruise lines will welcome passengers and let them know what deck they are on.  In the beginning of the cruise smiles and genuine pleasantries are exchanged among the passengers. However, before the cruise has reached its end, the novelty of the talking doors has worn off. Passengers are annoyed by the elevator voice.  Passengers are in a hurry to get away from the elevator.
                I make this comparison as I foresee the novelty wearing off.  I still think it would be great in a teaching environment, but I think the advertising has gotten out of hand as it is. Even my husband, who has done marketing and graphic design and does want to continue working in an advertising business, says he would not be comfortable with this app from a consumer's point of view.  We both feel that it is like having "big brother watching" at all times and that our  privacy is somehow being invaded.
                Before I close, I would like to describe two pictures and caption that recently caught my eye.  In the first picture, there are three children wading in the river and playing in the mud.  The expressions on their faces show that they are all having a wonderful time.  In the second picture, three teenage girls are shown with their eyes focused on their cell phones; one reading, two are texting. The reader reveals just a tiny bit more expression than the two "no-emotion-whatsoever" teens that are texting.  The caption reads:  "So glad I grew up doing this (picture number one) not this (picture number two)"

 

                In conclusion, we have become an electronic tech-minded society.  So many people seem so focused on their machines than that they don't even know how to respond to humans anymore.  I know that some people were surprised by the statistics of the older generation being more expressive (or emotionalist) than the younger generation.  It actually makes sense if you set your mind on the two pictures.  The older generation grew up relying on imagination and emotional contact. Many of the younger generation of the second picture are so busy with electronic technology, they fail to see or learn emotion.  I think it would be better for the majority of the human race to learn emotions from other humans and not be so reliable upon machines.

  The other assignment was on elaborating more on a certain fallacy.  I picked the one from this video below



Post-Hoc Fallacy

                                For most my life, I seem to have had a problem with communicating my point of view though I don't know when it started. I would guess it was during my teens when I picked up fallacies to use in my everyday vocabulary - which would explain my lack of proper communication.  I suppose I have been a walking fallacy waiting to happen.  Though several fallacies exist in my life currently,  my focus for this assignment will be on  the "post hoc fallacy" as demonstrated by Ernie and Bert.
                This fallacy can occur well before the teenage years. As I don't remember back this far from my own personal life, let me use my nephew as an example. There was a time when he was playing with a  light switch near the front window; at the same exact time, a fire truck barreled down the street.  Moving a light switch from one position to another has  absolutely nothing to do with the fire truck blaring, but in his two-year-old mind, he had caused the fire truck outside his window.  Of course, there was disappointment on his part when more fire trucks didn't appear as he continued to play with the switch.  That is one example of a post hoc fallacy. 
                Another example that I remember from my own life occurred when I was perhaps eight years of age.  In my bedroom were three posters of big-eyed girls.  Each had granulated backgrounds, one yellow, one pink and one blue.  My father had taken them down in order to paint my room.  He used masking tape at the edge of the ceiling in order to keep the ceiling white while painting the walls pink.  After he had finished, I started to retrieve the posters that that been removed.  I found only two, the blue and yellow.  As my big-eyed girl on the granulated pink background was missing, I frantically searched for it.  When I set my eyes upon a trash can full of the pink splotched masking tape, I cried because  I had assumed it was my missing poster crumbled in a heap.  I had jumped to conclusions.
                I think jumping to conclusions is what a  post hoc fallacy is; or in other words:  "After this, therefore, because of this"  Unfortunately I still haven't learned my lesson.  I still have that bad habit of thinking that because there was a ten dollar bill in my room before my daughter arrived and because it was missing when she left, she must have taken it.  This is a fallacy can be overcome if I will ask questions rather than make accusations.  I hadn't taken into consideration that she had turned on  the fan and the ten dollar bill had been blown onto the floor.
                My goal is (and has been) to try to analyze  not just the situation, but all of the possibilities involved. I know I haven't always taken  all the facts into account.  I need to ask questions and not accusations.  I need to understand the situation before drawing a conclusion.  I am better at trying to listen and understand.  I don't think I'll feel like I've accurately completed overcoming post hoc fallacy until I no longer jump to conclusions.

emotional References
Kaliouby, R. (2015, Dec 19). Ted Talks. Retrieved from You Tube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0N4ItKFhJDI

Matheson, R. (2014, July 31). A market for emotions. Retrieved from MIT News: http://news.mit.edu/2014/with-emotion-tracking-software-affectiva-attracts-clients-mood-aware-internet-0731

fallacy References

Logical fallacy: Post hoc ergo propter hoc

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NL7mai4uCb4

CRITICAL THINKING - Fallacies: Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc [HD]
                Paul Henne  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5A7hSaoRv0g

The Fallacy Project: Examples of fallacies from advertising, politics, and popular culture.
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXLTQi7vVsI