Week of September 24-30: Question 3

My favorite topic from this week's reading is Empathy. Empathy, as stated in the text, is the ability to enter into and understand the experiences and emotions of others. I have had to use this a lot in my life. Like I have stated before, I am very much dedicated to social justice and working towards a much more equal world. When you have privilege, it is often easy to bask in it and not notice how much power you actually have. It also makes it hard to see other people's forms of oppression. I think that empathy is one of the main things that helps solve that issue. What the book also states is that it can make us more understanding and compassionate people. We can be more flexible to others' desires and needs. It is a very positive value that can create a lot of change in our world.

Week of September 24-30: Question 2

I believe that Richard Dawkins brings up some very good points in his piece of writing The God Delusion. This piece is a direct argument to Thomas Aquinas's statements proving that there is a god. As Dawkins explains his rendition of Aquinas's statements, I think that the main point he is trying to make is that evolution and God can't exist at the same time. What I also feel, however, is that he doesn't really tackle the situation at hand. He goes on and tries to disprove the statements in the first article, but does nothing to suggest that it could be any different. I think that Dawkins lacks in providing his ideas and ways of thinking and focuses too much on bashing the first author. This argument does nothing to disprove evolution or god. I think the way they both describe it makes it possible for both to coexist.

CesarCOMM41

Week of September 24-30: Question 1

I think that overall, I am pretty strong when it comes to reasoning. The part of reasoning that I think I am strongest in, however, is imagination as it is stated on page 38. My major is Design Studies with an emphasis in Graphic Design, and I think that my imagination is what has made me successful in it. I don't plan on pursuing a career in the design field, and instead I am looking into applying for a graduate program in Student Affairs/Higher Education Administration in hopes of working at a four year institution. Like I have seen by observing my mentors, working in higher ed requires a lot of imagination. You are constantly having to plan new programs and events that students would want to participate in. You want to make sure that they are not repetitive or overused because that makes students not want to show up. You also have to look at new ways of keeping students engaged beyond programs. You have to be able to think outside of the box and create things that are going to make your university stand out from the rest.

-CesarCOMM41

Week 4: Question 2

Dr. Antonia Novello uses cause-and-effect inductive reasoning in a very effective manner. First, she took the statistics and results from the effects that Camel and Joe Camel advertisements had on children and teenagers in 1988. She saw that more children were consuming tobacco, so she used that cause to create a more positive effect. She went on and created a few things to help solve the problems. First she worked more with education to help make sure children learned the negative effects of alcohol. Secondly she worked on banning tobacco advertisements that would appeal to a younger generation. The cause was that Camel was making advertisements that appealed to children, and the effect was that the rates of children smoking were rising. She used this reasoning to create a positive change in the way that advertisements were created.

-CesarCOMM41

Week 4: Question 1

Inductive arguments are used all the time. I feel like it's a way of settling different life situations that makes us unsettled or uncomfortable. Just last week I was at work and had to plan an event that is somewhat of a mixer where students can come meet each other and professionals on the campus. Our goal (or our conclusion) was to make sure that students left having made at least two connections with others. What we did was plan different activities that we could do during this welcome in order to ensure that we would get the results that we wanted. We came up with a “speed dating” game and a name games where people could get to know each other. We also agreed to have some mingling time after the activities so that people could hang out in a scenario with less pressure. In the end our argument was this:

If students play the name game, do some speed dating, and mingle, they will hopefully have connected with at least two people.

-CesarCOMM41 

Week 4: Question 3

One of the concepts that I was really interested in from this chapter was Generalization. It somewhat ties in with what we were discussing last week. A generalization is when you come to a conclusion or make a statement about a certain group of people based on one example. For example, say I take a survey of X amount of SJSU students, and they all have taken general education classes. To say that all SJSU students (24,000+) have taken GE classes is a generalization. 

There are different ways in which you can make a proper generalization. You can take polls or surveys of groups of people. After you collect the information, you can draw a conclusion and make a generalization. You have to be careful though, because you want to make sure that you have an unbiased selection of candidates. Whether it’s random polling or selective sampling, you need to be sure to survey the right people or else your generalization will be skewed.

-CesarCOMM41

Week 3: Question 3

One concept that I learned in this weeks reading was deductive arguments. It is something that many of my teachers have brought up and talked about, but also something that I sometimes have trouble constructing. I feel that when I write, it tends to be more open ended, so I don't usually practice deductive arguments. The way that deductive arguments work is rather simple, and it had never been explained to me as straight forward as it’s written in the book. Hopefully I grasped the concept correctly:

In a deductive argument, the conclusion has to be true only if the premises are true.

Here’s an example that I came up with:

Cesar goes to San Jose State. All San Jose State students get an Eco Pass. Cesar gets an Eco Pass.

While the book has explained this to me a lot better than others have, I am still struggling with it a little bit. Hopefully with more practice and application I will get it down.

-CesarCOMM41

Week 3: Question 1

I believe that it is human nature to make assumptions about certain situations because we tend to have a fear of the unknown. It is really easy to simply put labels on things based on what others have said because it eliminates the process of thought and the time consumption that comes along with it. Once we accept those embellishments, they become a norm or a standard and getting rid of them is a lot harder than it is to gain them.

I have had plenty of experiences where people assume things about me based on my appearance. There have been several times where I walk into a small store and I get followed. The workers assume that because of my skin color or perceived race, I will most likely try to commit a burglary or vandalize their store. I have never committed any kind of crime related to that. It is clear to me that store employees who have followed me have a perception of Mexican/Mexican Americans as burglars or thieves. Their perceptions however are only based on assumption and generalization and lead them to believe an untrue image of me.

-CesarCOMM41

Week 2: Question 3

One concept that really caught my attention was the section in The Essential Guide to Group Communication about identifying and overcoming problems in group roles. I find that having known this information when working in groups in the past would have helped gotten our assignments a lot faster and a lot more efficiently. I also reflected on how I have taken these rolls many times. It's easy to disengage and be the problematic group member, so having knowledge of the following roles will help make me a better participant. I often find myself being an avoider. Sometimes I act as if I really don't want to be at a meeting even when I am passionate about what is being discussed because I don't know how to effectively communicate my discomfort with certain statements or decisions. The other role that I constantly play is that of distractor. When something is on my mind that I think is amazing I feel as if I have to share it with the world. I also find that when I'm working in a group setting a lot of discussions bring up memories or stories that I feel compelled to share then and there. This often invites others to share their stories, and hours later we find that we haven't gotten anything done. Putting names and definitions to these roles has helped me better understand how I can change and become a better group worker.

-CesarCOMM41

Week 2: Question 2

I am a strong believer in social justice and the idea of standing firm on equality regardless of the adversity that might present. That being said, I am not a big fan of offensive terms being thrown around as insults or mockery. I know that its something that’s engrained in our culture and we all hear it growing up, but it still doesn’t make it okay to use them.

I have a friend who loved saying words like “retard” or “faggot.” Every time I’d hear him say it, I’d cringe a bit but never had the courage to confront him about it because I was afraid of damaging our relationship. I also feared the possibility of him taking out some aggression on me by using terms that I wouldn’t like.

I saw myself forced to do some thinking. The more that I became aware about oppression and how those terms only enabled it, the more I felt uncomfortable whenever I heard him say them. I had to make the choice between letting him know how I felt about his ill taste of hurtful words, or just suck it up and let him continue doing his thing. Then I came to realize that I had no choice but to tell him. Why would I want to hold on to a friend if I wasn’t going to ever be comfortable around him? Needless to say, we had the conversation and it made us both uncomfortable. Thankfully, in the end the love that held our friendship together helped him understand my needs and helped me be forgiving if he ever slipped up.

-CesarCOMM41

Week 2: Question 1

While I think that President Barack Obama’s views on same sex marriage are more progressive than any other president I’ve witnessed in my lifetime, I still don’t think that they are as inclusive as they need to be. I see a couple of conflicts here, however, and can understand why perhaps Obama’s views aren’t necessarily conflicting with his beliefs in equal rights and opportunities for all people.

The term “marriage” is originally a religious term identifying the union of a man and a woman, which is where the problem begins. I think that he is trying to take the approach of making everyone happy-give the conservative/religious crowd ownership of their beliefs on the term, but also give gays and lesbians equal rights as everyone else.

I do appreciate Obama’s desire to fulfill everyone’s needs, but if our government is willing to accept “marriage” as a term for a legal union between two people, they should be able to separate its religious origin from its meaning. Our country is not supposed to be regulated by religion or religious beliefs.

Obama can respond to Nava and Dawidoff’s argument by saying that he wants the same protections for all people, but giving those protections different names. I don’t believe this to be fair or just. There is no reason for any person to be alienated by giving their rights a different name.

-CesarCOMM41