Get To Know Them When You . . . See, Read, or Hear Them
Above is an example of a common logical fallacy known as the ad hominem argument, which is Latin for "argument against the person" or "argument toward the person". Basically, an ad hominem argument goes like this:
Person 1 makes claim X
There is something objectionable about Person 1
Therefore claim X is false
There is something objectionable about Person 1
Therefore claim X is false
There are over 100 Fallacies and most likely you will not remember the names of even the most commonly used fallacies; however, what's important about Fallacies is your ability to recognize a claim or premise that lacks logic. When this happens, it falls under the category of being a fallacy.
Please open the link below and review this website devoted to fallacies. On the left side of the website is an extensive list of fallacies with definitions and then on the right side of the website--representing two-thirds of the page--are several articles with links to their full text as well as a couple videos that discuss the use of fallacies within today's news stories.
Your assignment is to choose an article or video and then discuss the fallacy that appears within the piece. If the author identifies the name of the fallacy, you can search for its definition on the left side of the website. If the author does not mention the name of the fallacy, see if you can figure out the name. Make sure that your discussion includes the following:
- The name of the article or video.
- The type of fallacy being used--if it is not given, then make an educated guess by reviewing the sidebar definitions.
- An explanation of the fallacy (in your own words)
- The implication of the fallacy if people were to believe what they read, viewed, or heard.
After posting your response, you must respond to two of your classmates postings by commenting about the implications of the fallacy or perhaps if you disagree with the student's choice in naming the fallacy, then you may comment on this. Just make sure that you have something meaningful to say by adding on to the student's existing conversation on the fallacy and/or topic.
Due Date: Tuesday, September 25th Please note that this is your last blog for First Quarter and the due date was extended because I posted it Monday night verses Sunday night.
Here is the Link:
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/index.htmlOne more request: When you sign your name, please include your period in order to make it just a bit easier for me to record your work. Mahalo.
Sincerely,
Ms. Carlson 3rd Period
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI choose to read the article on CSI and the controversial effects on supplements labeled “Clinically Studies Ingredient”. The fallacy I believe being used in the article is Circular Argument. Circular Argument is to beg for the question but argue fallaciously, in the article I found that the began the article with this "Clinically studied ingredient" is one such meaning-challenged phrase that seems to be widely used in describing dietary supplements, such as melatonin (see the illustration)” and all about the supplement itself, but in the end they say “We've seen similar phrases before, namely, "emerging science" and "emerging research" (see the Resources, below), which only mean that something has been studied, not that it has been shown to be effective or safe to use. Such phrases suggest more than they literally say, thus protecting those using them from lawsuits, and also fooling some people into buying their products”. Stating that even though the brought up the question, they find the labeling to be false and misleading. A fallacy to me is something that isn’t true, misleading and cannot be used as a source. I believe the implication of the fallacy from this article was for it to be heard, that if people read this article it would make them think twice before buying another supplement that can potentially be harmful and not properly tested for human use. Like I mentioned above about the “emerging science and emerging research” it only means it’s been studies but not shown to be effective or safe to use and that’s why I think they shouldn’t label a supplement “Clinically Studies Ingredient” if it isn’t studies, effective and safe to use.
Sincerely,
Ashlie Overmyer
Period: 3
DeleteDearest Ashlie,
DeleteIt's amazing how "emerging science" can only mean its been studied but not how its safe to use or can be healthy for our body. So many of us are tricked especially on commercials where they commonly state such things. Makes me scared to be deathly ill where I have no choice but to take these questionable medication.
Sincerly,
Kulia Blalock
Period 3
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDear Mrs. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe name of the article I read about was Check it Out? The Fallacy that is used is slanting. The Fallacy, slanting, is when the writing is one sided and ignores the counter evidence. If people were to believe what they read, the implication would be that people would be rushing to get a mammogram to prevent cancer. But in fact, they were actually being harmed more from getting the mammogram. Which means they will not live longer, because the risk of getting breast cancer is greater than the benefits.
Sincerely,
Maile Tuttle Period 3
Another example of this fallacy of slanting could be the urge of women to get breast implants. Every woman wants to be attractive and beautiful while totally ignoring the fact that you could induce dangerous diseases and if the implants got infected you could actually die.
DeleteDear Maile,
DeleteYou have a good point. The article you chose definitely put slanting to use. However, the last sentence of your response is confusing. When you write, "the risk of getting breast cancer is greater than the benefits," you are implying that there are benefits to getting breast cancer (though the risks outweigh the benefits). This last sentence weakens your otherwise great response.
Sincerely,
Jessica Meek, Period 2
Dear Maile,
DeleteI also chose that article and chose a different fallacy but after reading the fallacy you chose, I agree with you that the fallacy is slanting. Although I'm wondering, where did you get the idea from the article saying that people will get harmed more if they get a mammogram? I did not see anything in the article about getting a mammogram.
Sincerely,
Jenny Anne Paleracio
PD 2
Dear Maile,
DeleteAfter reading your definition of slanting, I realized (along with Kaikea) that girls use or do this a lot. The women now days are so caught up in making themselves look better, they ignore the danger of it. For example, they use tanning beds which could cause cancer, they have surgery on any part of their body, which is always dangerous. They also do things like Kaikea stated.
Respectfully,
Jonathan Paleka
Dear Maile
DeleteFrom your responses, i can see there's a lot of slanting in such subjects, many people who pay attention to the mass media and commercials to find new and beneficial ways to look better end up never really looking into the side effects, or the "cost" really of beauty.
Sincerely,
Brandon Jenks
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe article I chose to read was, “100% Juice (and some other stuff)”. This article describes how the juice companies, such as V8, are committing the fallacy of false precision, meaning that information is being claimed to be more precise than it actually is. False precision is often used to impress the public when advertising a product. The V8 company did just this with their claim to being 100% juice, when in reality there was a sliver of various ingredients that had been added to the drink. If people were to believe such false information it may have various effects. For example, if a product claims to be 100% one thing, yet contains other ingredients, a person may consume the product and have an allergic reaction to an unknown ingredient. This may result in the person suing the company. Therefore the risks that are to follow the committing of false precision out way the benefits.
Respectfully,
Shania Weiss period 3
Dear Shania,
DeleteI think that the fallacy of false precision is something that should not be reckoned with. i agree that committing this type of literary crime could lead to problems for people with fatal food allergies and health issues.
Sincerely,
Podma Phillips Pd:3
Dear shania,
DeleteI agree with you that false precision is horrible. Just thinking that someone could die or have a serious accident just by believing the label and not reading the ingredients is a sad thing.
Sincerely,
Kanani Colburn
Period 3
Dear Shania,
DeleteI totally agree with you 100%!! This article is very good and very intriguing when it comes to fallacies because they are in fact, lying to people about the ingredience! I mean what if what you said in your article comes true! People and the companies could be sued for their false advertisements! Great response!
Sincerely, maile tuttle. Pd3
The article that I read was titled CSI.
ReplyDeleteI think the type of fallacy being used is Logical Fallacy.
This Fallacy causes a misleading thought, or a mistaken reasoning about what is stated and what it means. It causes people to make certain accusations about what the statement implies. In other words, and error in reasoning.
The statement "Clinically studied ingredient" is used on a lot of medications. People think that it implies the medication was approved as safe because it was studied, but in actuality this statement is vague and it doesn’t say what the results were after it was studied. The minds of people are fooled into buying these medications, and if the medications are in fact unsafe, it could harm their health. And because so many people fall for this fallacy, the safety and health of majority of society is at stake.
Respectfully,
Jalissa Rapozo-Carveiro Pd.3
***Dear Ms. Carlson*** -forgot
DeleteDear Jalissa,
DeleteI agree with you that just because something is a "clinically studied ingredient" does not mean it is approved. If I were to read that something is a clinically studied ingredient, I would assume that it is safe. Stating that something is a studied ingredient could give people false impressions on the safety on the product.
Sincerely,
Jenny Anne Paleracio
PD 2
Dear Jalissa,
DeleteI too read this article and chose this type of fallacy. I completely agree with what you've written, especially that the safety and health of society is at stake due to fallacies such as this one.
Respectfully,
Amber Diaz
Dear Mrs. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe article I read was “Check It Out” the type of fallacy used was quantification fallacy. Quantification fallacy is an error in logic, and contradicts the quantifier of the conclusion. The implication of the fallacy if people were to believe what they read then they would end up living longer if they get tested earlier for breast cancer, and that the five year after diagnosis applies to them. But if you didn’t have cancer and it was a false positive then you could in fact get cancer caused by all the radiation you are given from kimo.
Sincerely,
Kristen Yam
Pd 3
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDelete100% juice (and Some Other Stuff)
I believe that this article shows the fallacy of fake precision.
This fallacy is that the most certain and precise statistics are bogus.
The implication of the fallacy if people were to believe what they read, viewed, or heard could have some consequences. For instance if someone has a doctor prescribed no salt intake or any other non juice substance and see the label that V8 is 100% vegetable juice. It may actually cause someone health problems or even worse put them back into the hospital. People need to read ingredients not only labels. Fallacies in stores can be dangerous.
Sincerely,
Kaikea Sonoda
Dear Kaikea,
DeleteWhen you stated "People need to read the ingredients not only labels," I felt as though you were implying that the fault lies in the hands of the people. However, the fault is truly in the hands of the company who is committing the fallacy of false precision. Therefore, the implications that are to follow are also the fault of the company, not the consumer.
Respectfully,
Shania Weiss.
Dear Kaikea,
DeleteI totally agree with you man. The information they put on those labels is bogus! If they keep putting false advertisements on their products then the world will be in a big pile of crap.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Paleka
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe article that I chose was “CSI”. It was about how some companies will state meaningless words in order to make their product seem superior. The fallacy used is a persuasive fallacy. It’s a ‘commonly accepted’ or 'true’ meaning of a term that is really altered or used to persuade someone into doing something. In this case; purchasing a product with a phase that appears to be good but is actually just a marketing technique.
If people were to believe the phrases printed on vitamin bottles or other medicines, such as; “clinically studied ingredients” or “emerging research,” they automatically think that the ingredients and research must be good. People don’t really realize that the research could be bad or that the clinically studied ingredients may actually have a negative effect.
Respectfully,
Podma Phillips Pd: 3
Dear Ms.Carlson ,
ReplyDeleteThe name of my article was “How Many Orphans?”. My article was about the number of children affected by the terrorists attacks of September 11, 2001. This article spoke of how some newspapers published that almost 15,000 kids were made orphans, when in reality only almost 3,000 people were killed in the attacks. I believe the type of fallacy being used is propositional fallacy because this fallacy is when there is an error in logic that concerns compound propositions. Which is basically what is going on in this article with the false information early on in the article. Even though this info was given right after this happened so it was more of a rough estimate. The implification of what people read than they would actually slow down or donate less knowing that most of these kids aren’t full orphans; they are only missing one parent not both.
Sincerely,
Triston Edmonds
PD.3
Dear Triston,
DeleteI looked at your response and thought that the article you committed on interesting. Thinking back on the fallacy it was really interesting that they changed 15000 to 3000 which is a pretty big drop in what really happened. I mean the effects are still bad, but that's still a big twist they made with the information.
Sincerely,
Kalani Murakami Period 1
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe article I chose to read was called "100% juice (and some other stuff)." I feel the fallacy within this article that can be found is bad reasons fallacy. Bad reasons fallacy is where there is even if the argument is invalid and the claim is true it doesn't prove its conclusion. Within the article it talks about how juice products such as V8 put multiple advertisement of 100% juice onto their product. However as you look within the ingredients there are very well substances that would not be normally classified as juice. Benjamin Radford decided to inquire more about the topic and as the customer service representative seemed confused about his questioning she said that in fine print near the bottom it states "from concentrate with added ingredients." All of the ingredients were considered to be real juice substances up to salt. The suppliers of the products were not expecting consumers to be questioning their labels which was probably a main advocate for why these people do what they did. Although within certain proximity you can read that the product says 100% juice (from concentrate with added ingredients) you can argue otherwise that it is not, making this a bad reason fallacy. If people were to read the article I just read about this common fallacy, people would be more aware of the ingredients that go into our food and hopefully pay attention to the nutrition facts. They trick us into taking the "healthy choice" which isn't as healthy as we believe.
Sincerely,
Kulia Blalock
Period 3
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe article I read was CSI. The type of fallacy I think is being used is logical fallacy. Logical fallacy is when the writer implies a misleading thought to what is stated than what it really means. The phrase “clinically studied ingredient” is commonly used in describing dietary supplements, such as the one listed in this article, Melatonin. From reading the misused statement, it makes it sound like a safe and effective product, but what people don’t know is the real meaning toward it. “Just the fact that someone has clinically studied it tells us little.” In some cases, people think that it’s a safe and effective product to take because it has been “clinically studied.” Companies, such as the one developing Melatonin, can also be fooling their customers into buying their products by using phrases that say more than they literally mean.
Sincerely,
Kendra Vega, Period 3
Dear Kendra,
DeleteI agree with you in that alot of people don't realize that the claim "clinically studied" does not make a product stafe. I also believe that many companies are aware that many people fail to see this, and they capitalize on the peoples stupidity by commiting the fallacy you described. I think this may become very dangerous in such cases where the study actually reveals negative affects to the consumer, yet the company fails to advertise such effects.
Sincerely,
Shania Weiss, Period 3
Dear Kendra,
DeleteI definitely agree with you that the fallacy being used is logical fallacy. I also read this article and used this fallacy. I think that if companies are going to put information on their products they should be clear about it.
Sincerely,
Nikki Ramos
Period 1
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI chose the article titled, "Getting it Right." This article contains the fallacy of "equivocation," which is when a word has more than one meaning and the different definitions change what the sentence means. This article is discussing the error made in an obituary: a photograph showed "the aftermath of one of the thousands of bombings in the countryside by American planes." However, the bombers were South Vietnamese. Though technically the sentence is true, (the planes were manufactured in America, therefore they are American), the use of the word American is misleading. It could cause people to think that the horrible bombings were done by America's air force. This could cause a lot of tension between Americans and our government--people would believe that our government was responsible for the bombings.
Sincerely,
Jessica Meek, Period 2
Dear Jessica,
DeleteI agree with your analysis of the article "Getting it Right". I was originally going to analyze this article and i believe you got it spot on. The use of the world "American" could really create a lot of tension because if Americans don't take the time to read the entire article they would not know that the planes were only manufactured in America, not flown by Americans.
Respectfully,
Aveilana Saldana
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDelete1. The name of the article or video.
Translation and Scope
2. The type of fallacy being used--if it is not given, then make an educated guess by reviewing the sidebar definitions.
Scope and ambiguous fallacy
3. An explanation of the fallacy (in your own words)
When sentences are translated into another language or some of the grammar is switched or left out, the meaning and entire sentence can change completely.
4. The implication of the fallacy if people were to believe what they read, viewed, or heard.
People who are stupid would think that if they are ever kidnapped or stolen, it refreshes their memory that they need to call the police. So if someone translated something they did not understand from another language into their own, they would believe the translation, not realizing that they are reading the translation completely changed because of slight grammar switch ups.
Sincerely,
Shianne Schorr
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI chose the article titled, "Billboard". The fallacy embodied in this article is "The Hitler Card". It means that a bad person, like Hitler, Osama Bin Laden, or The Unabomber, is used as an ad to arouse negative feelings toward whatever they are advertising. Person X believes *this*, person X is bad, so therefore *this* is bad too. If people were not aware of the fallacy being used to sway their emotions. they might think that this *thing* is bad before they even researched it to form their own logical opinion. In the case of this billboard, people might think that believing in global warming is bad because the Unabomber believes in it.
Respectfully,
Aveilana Saldana *Pd. 2*
Dear Ave,
DeleteI agree that ' The Hitler Card' is an agreeable fallacy for you article. I believe that may political arguments can contain this fallacy, but is a harder one to recognize. But in this day and age with easy access to information the ' Hitler Card' may be a harder fallacy to base a agreeable article one.
Sincerely,
Whitney Beck
Period 2
Dear Ave,
DeleteI agree with what you have stated about "Billboard." It makes me want to know a lot more information about a topic before I make an opinion or a statement.
Sincerely,
Shianne Schorr
Dear Ave,
DeleteI also read this article and agree with your implications of the fallacy. If people believed something was bad before they even researched it everyone one would think things like global warming was bad just because someone like Osama Bin Laden believes in it. Really good response!
Sincerely,
Maria Fish Pd: 2
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI chose the article 'How to Hoax Wikipedia', then continued on reading the main article in 'The Atlantic'. I came to the conclusion that their argument contained the fallacy of Hasty generalization, an unrepresentative sample. They used that fallacy by basing their argument on a minority example of one collage classes experience with hoaxing Wikipedia. Even though this class may have created a hoax to show wikipedias weak system, they have not considering other proven examples. Not taking into consideration countless examples of when this sites information was proven true, and very helpful. If the audience was to assume the article was true, they would come to believe that wikipedia is an unreliable source, and false information is easy and fast to submit, while it takes time to correct.
Sincerely,
Whitney Beck
Period 2
Dear Whitney,
DeleteI agree with you completely! If people thought that Wikipedia was an unreliable source and false information was easy to get, it would take way more time to correct the assignment because it is all false information! Good response!
Sincerely,
Maria Fish
Dear Ms. Carlson,,
ReplyDeleteI chose the article Check It Out. The type of fallacy being used in this article is "Appeal to Misleading Authority".
In my own words, Appeal To Misleading Authority means that if a fact is stated, then it must be definitely true.
If people were to believe "The 5 year survival rate for breast cancer when caught early is 98%," then people would believe that early detection could save your life span for 5 years, rather than if you weren't detected early and your life span would be shorter because you didn't try early detection.
Sincerely,
Jenny Anne Paleracio
Period 2
Dear Jenny,
DeleteI believe that it is very important for people to realize certain life-changing statistics, but it is unnerving to think that people would share false, misleading information. Your definition of the fallacy is very accurate; we can't believe everything we hear.
Respectfully,
Kekai Gonsalves
Dear Jenny,
DeleteI completely agree with the fallacy you chose for this article. It is unbelievable to think people would share such information that could be so misleading. Fallacies are not okay at all, especially when they involve the health of the general public.
Respectfully,
Amber Diaz.
Dear jenny,
DeleteI really agree with you on your eesponse because I did the same thing! I liked that you also used a different fallacy! This shows that there could be and are more fallacies in an article! Thank you for you comment!
Respectfully, Maile Tuttle
Period 3
Dear Ms.Carlson ,
ReplyDeleteThe name of the article that I read was “How Many Orphans?”. The article that I read was about the number of children affected by the terrorists attacks of September 11, 2001. The article said that some newspapers published that almost 15,000 kids were made orphans, but with only about 3,000 people being killed in the attacks. This being said it is almost impossible for there to be that many orphans given the amount of people that were killed in the attacks, so I believe the type of fallacy that is being used is propositional fallacy because propositional logic studies the logical relations and when there is an error in logic that concerns compound propositions. Which is what is going on in this article, they gave false information early on in the article. The information was more of an estimate because the information they gathered about the orphans was right after the attacks so it was more of an estimate instead of stated facts. The implication of fallacy if the people actually read the facts and not just what they heard then they would either donate less knowing that most of these kids aren’t full orphans or just donate to the kids that are actually orphans.
Respectfully,
Gavin Bryan Period 2
Dear Gavin,
DeleteIn my opinion, it's a very silly one. The stretching of facts is just used to draw in readers. I too, agree with your fallacy in "How Many Orphans?".
Respectfuly,
Jimmelle Parong
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI chose to read the article "Billboard". This article contained two fallacies. One was "guilt by association" which is where someone tries to discredit an idea based upon disfavored people or groups connected with it. So it argues against an idea based upon associating it with disreputable people or groups. The article is talking about how people like Charles Manson, who is a mass murderer believes in global warming. That is saying that anyone who believes in Global Warming is a mass murderer. Of course that is a false statement! If people believed this statement the world would be even crazier than it already is.
The other fallacy was "two wrongs make a right". This means the attempt to account for a wrong answer by distracting it with another wrong action. In the article the man behind the billboard campaign named Bast quoted that "This billboard was deliberately provocative, an attempt to turn the tables on the climate alarmists by using their own tactics but with the opposite message. We found it interesting that the ad seemed to evoke reactions more passionate than when leading alarmists compare climate realists to Nazis or declare they are imposing on our children a mass death sentence." He compared his issue to Nazis. Two wrongs make a right according to Bast. If people were to believe this no fights would ever be resolved!
Sincerely,
Maria Fish Pd: 2
Dear Maria,
DeleteYour article definitely had two dominate fallacies, both trying to create an argument about wrong actions create a certain outcome. These fallacies make this article very weak and not very persuasive. I also agree with you in that if people are quick to believe these ridiculous statements that the world be chaos, trying to cover up wrong with worse and pointing fingers to blame others. Not a very nice way to live.
Sincerely,
Whitney Beck
Period 2
Dear Maria,
DeleteThe consequences of "Two wrongs make a right" would be serious. I agree with you when you say, "no fights would ever be resolved!" If this fallacy was often used, all anyone's arguments would do would create negative but illogical feelings and blame people who are considered "bad."
Sincerely,
Jessica Meek, Period 2
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI chose the article “Billboard”. In this article two types of fallacies are being used, guilt by association and two wrongs make a right. Guilt by association is basically when someone associated with a bad thing supports something, the thing that they support is automatically assumed bad since. Two wrongs make a right is when someone is trying to justify something by distracting the audience with wrongdoings of others or saying what they did is okay because others are doing the same thing. If people were to believe what they read in the article then they would think that it would be bad to believe in global warming because people who believe in global warming are a mass murder, tyrant, or a terrorist.
Sincerely,
Alanna Bauman Period 2
Dear Alanna,
DeleteYou proved your last point well by using the global warming example. I feel as though your response was clear and concise. Good job!
Sincerely,
Madisson Hinkel-Pd. 1
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe article ‘Translation and Slope’ familiarizes us with the fact that “ambiguity of language is much greater than researchers realized.” They furthered the discussion of a type of scope ambiguity by trying to explain the phrase, “Every man admires some woman.” The sentence has two quantifiers- “some” and “every”. They both have very wide scope and therefore can be interpreted differently, especially if translated into the Arabic language.
Scope lets the audience understand modifiers in different ways depending on how they think. Scope ambiguity can be used to trap the reader and cause them to fall into fallacy. It is simply a lack of sharing all the information as a writer and allowing the reader to comprehend as they may.
The article in Slate may have touched on the difficulties of computer translation, but if they people who read and viewed the article didn’t dig deeper they wouldn’t have realized just how difficult it is.
Respectfully,
Kekai Gonsalves
Dear Kekai,
DeleteI had read a different article, but this article seems interesting. I thought that the definition of your fallacy was very well done and thorough.
Sincerely,
Alanna Bauman
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI chose the article "They're Back." In this article it uses a fallacy of fake precision. Fake precision is when someone makes a statement more precise then it really is. This article states that it would be practically impossible to check all the the gas stations in one day, but they have no actual proof that the government doesn't or even that it's impossible to check all these prices. This author is just assuming its impossible to check all the prices of gas in the country. This article states "gas prices varies throughout the country." Well it does but the average is the middle or typical price of gas in the country. There is no solid proof that the government doesn't check every gas station in the U.S.
Sincerely,
DeleteCarli Haddock
Pd.2
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe article that I read is called “Blurb Watch: Man on a Ledge”. The fallacy used here is called cherry picking. This woman who wrote a blog review on a movie, was really trying to say how much she didn’t like the movie. But, when saying one good thing about the movie, she made it sound like she was praising the movie as a whole. If people believed what they read, people would actually think that the movie was a really good movie, instead of it only having one good aspect to it. People might have actually spent money to go see the movie, when it had not so good reviews.
Sincerely,
Cassie Wilson, Pd2
Dear Cassie,
DeleteIn your article, "Blurb Watch: Man on a ledge" was a great review. It really does show how the way you explain something can give a huge effect on the way someone thinks and how someone thinks you think as well and that we need to explain something properly.
Sincerely,
Shianne Schorr
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI analyzed the article Billboard for its fallacies. The fallacies to this article were given and they were guilt by association and two wrongs make a right. The fallacy “guilt by association,” is when you’re not fond of a person, everything they’re interested in is something you will dislike or think is wrong. For example I dislike a person but they like taco bell so I automatically dislike taco bell. Or “Hitler was in favor of euthanasia. Therefore, euthanasia is wrong. “ Two wrongs make a right, is a fallacy they use to hide the given right, or not directly stating what it is. I believe that the fallacy is that is used in the article “Billboard” is trying to say that Ted Kaczynski was a Unabomber and still “believes” in global warming, which pertains to guilt by association because if people hate him they will hate global warming. Also being able to stop the Unabomber, maybe they would be able to stop global warming, or at least do something about it.
Sincerely,
Alexis Vicente Period 2
Dear Alexis,
DeleteI totally agree with your choice of fallacy in the "Billboard" article. Your details compliment it. It is possible to be a "Hilter Card"fallacy but this makes more sense to me. Thanks for giving it a different perspective!
Sincerely,
Jimmelle Parong
Dear Alexis,
DeleteGuilt by Association seems like a really immature fallacy! It's a shame that the author is using such a weak tactic in order for the reader to see from their point of view. It's almost self degrading. Now that I know a little more about it I will never use it in one of my argumentative essays!
Sincerely,
Amanda Althouse
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe article I read was “Check it Out?”. From what I can tell, I believe that the fallacy found in this story is Logical Fallacy. The article explained that Susan G. Komen’s contrary to fact ad wasn’t all it seemed to be. The advertisement claims that it will lengthen your life (by getting a mammogram) up to five years, if caught early. Common type of error in reasoning is what a Logical Fallacy is. And stating that the statistics are 93% survival rate (if caught early) and 23% (if not) is misleading. As said in the article, “Suppose that Sue is diagnosed with an advanced case of disease D in 2016, then dies in 2019. So, Sue was not alive five years after diagnosis. In contrast, if Sue had been diagnosed at an earlier stage of the disease in 2013, she would have been alive five years after diagnosis and, thus, contributed to the higher survival rate for early diagnosis. Nonetheless, she didn't live a second longer with the early diagnosis than with the later one.” Clearly, it’s an accurate example, in contrast to what the advertisement affirms. If people were to believe what they viewed or read in that article/fallacy; it may prevent breast cancer- but on the other hand it may not lengthen your life for five years. And possibly, even harm you.
Sincerely,
Jimmelle Parong 2nd Period
Dear Jimmelle,
DeleteI also read this article, and it seems interesting which fallacy you thought it contained, and I totally agree with you! The percentages are misleading and it almost seems like a crime that these women who see this inaccurate data, are led to believe it. It seems like it would give people a false sense of hope.
Respectfully,
Amanda Althouse
Dear Jimmelle,
DeleteI also reviewed this article and agree with you that the logical fallacy is the fallacy most represented in this article because the ad uses bad reasoning to get more people to come in for screening.
Sincerely,
Cody Palmer Period 2
Dear Ms. Carlson
ReplyDeleteThe article I chose was, “Efforts to ban Chlordane assailed.” The fallacy committed within this article was a faulty analogy; a faulty analogy is an analogy that is not based on a good structure therefore lacking logic.
In the article the topic of banning the use of chlordane is discussed. Chlordane is reported to cause cancer in 300000 individuals in the next seventy years according to the environmental protection agency. Chlordane is used to protect crops from bugs but is is also used in exterminating bugs from houses.
An outraged extermination business owner says, “This reminds me of a legislation that ought to be introduced to outlaw automobiles,” on the grounds that automobiles cause people to die. It is not the automobiles that cause the people to die; it is the driver’s responsibility of what his automobile kills. Maybe we should ban people to, because people kill people.
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI chose to read the article “Check it Out?” The type of fallacy being used in this article is Base Rate Fallacy.
Base Rate Fallacy in my own words means that they make an educated guess on what you would have or get in the next so many years, but they are not 100% positive on their experiment or educated guess.
If the readers and viewers believed everything that they saw or read as in “The 5 year survival rate for breast cancer when caught early is 98%. When it’s not? 23%” then we wouldn’t even have that 23% of citizens survival rate is not detected earlier because everybody would be checking for breast cancer as early as they can.
Sincerely,
Kayla Tokuda Pd. 2
Dear Kayla,
DeleteBase Rate Fallacy seems very interesting. I can't believe that some people would fall for this fallacy, unless completely based on proven scientific experiments and theory. I enjoyed your response.
Respectfully,
Kekai Gonsalves
Dear MS. CARLSON
ReplyDeleteThe article I decided to read, out of sheer curiosity, was "CSI". The fallacy the I found there was logic. Logic referring to the melatonin which is in fact used as a medical dietary supplement.
The logical statement here is that this is a " clinically studied" item. And although it may say that it has been studied it does not literally mean it is at all safe. It only is a mere suggestion that it is, it is something that is implied . It is a suggestion put there intentionally to full the consumer or buyer.Its a suggestion that makes you question it. Because it never lets off more that it says in those words. .A "CLINICALLY STUDIED INGREDIENT". so you get it, its logic.
Ralna Sheldon pd.2,
PS: thanks for reading. :)
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe passage I chose to evaluate is called, "It is Your Life that is Involved"”. In this writing sample, the author goes into detail about problems with abortion, and why it should be thought of as an absolutely vile thing.
I believe the fallacy in this article is Slippery Slope. A slippery slope fallacy begins to assume more and more unlikely or extreme events as the argument progresses. For example, the passage says “following the acceptance of abortion, comes the acceptance of infanticide―the killing of babies who after birth do not come up to someone's standard of life worthy to be lived―and then on to euthanasia of the aged.” This argument quickly progresses from a beginning purpose, to an assumption, to an even crazier assumption.
While there could be some chance that the assumptions will be valid, the author lacks concrete evidence to prove that the chance occurrences have ever actually happened. Also, if we truly believed that the implication of this fallacy were truth, people would be quick to draw the conclusion that abortion early in life will lead to a loss of value in human life in the future. While abortion may be a highly debated subject, the repercussions may not necessarily lead to this conclusion.
Sincerely,
Maluhia Kinimaka (Period 1)
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe article I chose to read was How Many Orphans? The fallacy that is being used is hasty generalization. A hasty generalization is something that’s based on a sample that has not enough detail and information to be legit. In this case The New York Times said there “were no children orphaned by the attacks” of 9/11 and on the other side of the spectrum the Twin Towers Orphan Fund said were orphans. Early on in the article there was false information, most of it was just guessed. If people get what they give out by just inferring things then most of what they put will be fallacies.
Respectfully,
Jonathan Paleka
Dear Jonathan,
DeleteBefore I chose to switch my article, I was going to evaluate the passage "How Many Orphans?" as well. I also thought that the fallacy was Hasty Generalization because they made a vague stab at the information. Also, I thought the article used propositional logic because they proposed logic which was not entirely true.
Sincerely,
Maluhia Kinimaka (Period 1)
Dear Jonathan,
DeleteWhile reading the article "How Many Orphans?" I also believed that the fallacy being used was Hasty Generalization. There were many times in the article where they had statements and facts, but not enough supporting details to make it fully true.
Sincerely,
Lexy Stogner Pd: 1
Dear Jonathan,
DeleteYou were accurate to use hasty generalization as the fallacy. I found many examples through out the article that had to support or and accuracy what so ever, therefor proving that this article was indeed a hasty generalization.
Sincerely,
Sariah Beeby Pd. 1
Dear Ms Carlson
ReplyDeleteI chose the article “Don't Get Up”. The fallacy that is used is the Logical Fallacy. The study made a huge leap when they said that sitting will take years off your life, there is nothing that correlated sitting to a shorter lifespan. The implications if people believed the article is they would standup more and be more active.
Respectfully,
Lars Vali
Pd.2
Dear Lars,
DeleteI agree with you that the article made a false correlation between sitting and a shorter lifespan. Sometimes it feels as if our bodies need to be seated or in a relaxed position to give our muscles a break! I also agree that this article uses Logical Fallacy because the examples they provide are just bad reasoning.
Sincerely,
Maluhia Kinimaka (Period 1)
Dear Lars,
DeleteI agree with you on saying this is a logical fallacy, because the fallacy is when bad reasoning and error is used and you pointed out that this article is indeed using bad reasoning to manipulate the reader or viewer.
Sincerely,
Cody Palmer Period 2
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI read the article entitled CSI.I believe the fallacy used in this article was logical fallacy. In my own words, a logical fallacy is simply an error or mistake in an individuals logic during an arguement. In the article the phrase "Clinically studied ingridient" is said to be used on many medications, causing the general public to believe that the medication is safe for use, however does the medication say anything about the effects? Or what the results of the clinical study were? This fallacy can indeed harm many people and is very misleading.
Respectfully,
Amber Diaz.
Dear Amber,
DeleteI agree with your comments about the "clinically studied ingredient". I feel that medications should be labeled more clearly in order to inform customers of the product they are using.
Respectfully,
Brooke Spencer, Period 1
Dear Ms.Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe article I read was called Check it Out? The fallacy that's being used within the article is an over precision, this occurs when there is information that seems more accurate than it really is. In the article is misleading because the study does not distinguish between those who do and don't benefit from an early diagnosis of breast cancer. The implications of people actually believing in the article are that women may think that if they get an early diagnosis of breast cancer than they will survive longer than someone who had a later diagnosis, when in fact the given percentages are totally inaccurate.
Respectfully,
Amanda Althouse
Period 2
Dear Amanda,
DeleteI also wrote my article on check it out, however i used slanting as my fallacy. I do not think that over precision is a very accurate description of the fallacy used in this article. Although your implications were correct I believe that slanting is still the more precise fallacy to be used.
Dear Ms.Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe article I chose to read was "CSI". I believe the Logical Fallacy is being used. In my own words, logical fallacy is a mistake in reasoning. The phrase "Clinically studied ingredient" is said to be used on a lot of medications. People think that the medication is safe to be used, but in actuality this statement is uncertain and it doesn’t say what the effects are. From reading the misused statement, it makes it sound like a safe and effective product, but people don’t know the real meaning towards it. This can harm the safety and health of many people.
Respectfully,
Angelika Questin (Period 2)
Dear Ms.Carlson
ReplyDeleteThe article I chose was 100% juice (and some other stuff). I feel that the fallacy for this article would be false precision. False precision to me is when a company is advertising a product making it look better or healthier than it really is such as the 100% juice. 100% juice is clearly not what most people think it is, there are ingredients such as citric acid, guar gum, calcium hydroxide and many other different ingredients in this so called "100% juice", if someone was allergic to any of these it can cause dangerous side effects or death. I think you should always read the ingredients no matter how convincing the label of the product may be.
Sincerely,
Kanani Colburn
Period 3
Dear Kanani,
DeleteBig companies should definitely not use fallacies when advertising. I agree that people should read the labels to products to make sure there getting whats advertised.
Sincerely,
Alanna Bauman
Dear Kanani,
DeleteThe fallacy "false precision" is actually very dangerous. You're so right about people being allergic to what they call "100 % juice." I think people need to honestly change their ways, instead of putting other people in danger.
Thank you,
Alexis Vicente
Period 2
Dear Kanani,
DeleteI totally agree with you that the fallacy used in this article was false precision because they use incorrect numbers. These advertisements should really be more clear because people should be able to trust that what is being said is true, and they aren't being lied too.
Sincerely,
Nikki Ramos
Period 1
Dear Kanani,
DeleteI agree with your comments. I feel that companies should better label they're products in order to inform consumers of possible ingredients contained within the product that said consumer could be allergic to.
Respectfully,
Brooke Spencer, Period 1
Dear Jalissa,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you when I read this article, especially when you said that the societys health and safety is at stake. Just because its studied doesn't mean that its a safe product for use.
Sincerely,
Kanani Colburn
Period 3
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe article 'Blurb Watch: To Rome With Love' pointed out the use of the Suppressed Evidence fallacy in an ad, in which a certain portion of an article/paper is pulled out and used out of context in order to make it seem more positive. If people were to believe what they read, they might think the movie to be better than the reviews actually made it out to be, as the quote shown in an advertisement for To Rome With Love makes one think that critics gave it a high rating, when in fact it only received a 2.5/4 (from the particular critic being quoted).
Sincerely,
Aidan Moore, period three
Dear Aidan,
DeleteI completely understand why they didn't want to show the truth about the rating of the movie. The movie would not get anyone going to see it if they showed the bad ratings, but it is indeed still a fallacy none-the-less. I see this done constantly in advertisements for movies. Now I go online and look for reviews before I see the movie. Online I can find the truth.
Sincerely,
Kailer Scopacasa
Period 1
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI read the article entitled Getting it Right. The fallacy being used in this specific article is equivocation. When a phrase is equivated, it gives it two meanings. In this article, it describes the author equivocating the word “American” when he distinguishes where the planes were from. The planes were apart of the South Vietnamese Air Force, but they were built in America, technically making them American planes. This is an example of equivocation. If people were to misconstrue this fallacy, in a way they would be believing that American planes bombed their own country, which is just plain ridiculous.
Sincerely,
Lexy Stogner Pd. 1
Dear lexy,
DeleteI totally agree with equivocation is totally misleading. It would also be very entertaining to see how many people would fall for such a fallacy.
Sincerely,
Alexis Vicente
period 2
Dear Lexy,
DeleteI also believe equivocation is a fallacy commonly fallen for. It has the ability to confuse people into thinking certain things.
Sincerely,
Madisson Hinkel-Pd. 1
Dear Ms. Carlson
ReplyDeleteThe article "Getting it Right" seems to have of a "poisoning of the well" in it's discussion. The topic is about a controversial photo taken during the Vietnam war, commonly known as the "Napalm girl", where a group of kids, namely a small 9 year old Vietnamese girl, who's clothes have been burnt off, with the blame in the article that used this photo directed towards "American Planes". Now though the attack was actually conducted by the South Vietnamese Air Force, the aircraft's used for the assault were "American made". Now, even though the plane was merely made by America, and used by the south Vietnamese, this doesn't mean that the blame can directly be put on America. It's saying "Because America built these planes, America is responsible for this atrocity, thus "Poisoning the well"; which is to blame somebody or something for a action that they are not directly related or responsible for.
Sincerely,
Brandon Jenks, period one.
Dear Brandon,
DeleteAs always I very much enjoy reading what you have to say. I do very much agree that the image was propaganda in favor of the Vietnamese and to the average viewer it poisoned the well. Without any further investigation into the war anyone could look at this photo and point the finger right at the American forces. It, like many things, give off a very one-sided image.
Sincerly,
Peter Sizelove - Period 1
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI studied the article "Contextomy Watch" and studied the use of Contextomy within it. The article is about a quote from Barack Obama that states, "If you’ve got a business―you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen." - The quote was manipulated and taken out of context. A Contextomy is a quote that is taken out of context in order to give a false impression. The false impression given in this article is that Barack Obama thinks that entrepreneurs are not responsible for building their business, when this is clearly not the case. It is very obvious that the quote was taken out of context, especially when I watched the video and observed the way he said this particular part of his speech. He is instead referring to his earlier statement about roads and bridges, explaining that the entrepreneurs alone are not solely responsible for every aspect of their business, but that the infrastructure and everything else that surrounds their business also helps them.
Sincerely,
Griffin Madden - Period 1
Dear Griffin,
DeleteI would first like to state I personally love politics and I feel that the air that it appears to be in is mostly a fog of mismatched contexts and instability of power and humanity. Many things that politicians say are taken out of context because most people, being the imperfect beings that we all are, have ideals that sometimes interferes with the actual fact. It is contextomy and mere quote mining.
Sincerly,
Peter Sizelove - Period 1
Dear Griffin
ReplyDeleteA lot of things in politics seem to be taken out of context, and this "If you've got a business" quote is a prime example, contextomy at it's prime, giving the impression that Obama doesn't recognized the hard work of entrepreneurs, but really saying that yes, the infrastructure and other financial variables that go along with it helps.
Sincerely,
Brandon Jenks-period 1
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI read the article "Check It Out?" after I finished the article I chose that the fallacy used was slanting. Slanting is when the writing seems to be one sided and ignores the evidence being argued. If you had fallen for this fallacy and agreed with the article then you would be rushing to get a mammogram and telling all your friends to get one also, while in fact you might be doing yourself more harm then good. In reality you are not actually living longer you are just aware of if you have breast cancer sooner.
Sincerely,
Sariah Beeby Pd. 1
Dear Sariah,
DeleteIt is indeed a fallacy because for an effective argumentative essay, you need to take other sides into consideration. The whole point of an argument is to understand what you're arguing against and then counter it with supported information. I will not fall for this fallacy.
Sincerely,
Kailer Scopacasa
Period 1
Dear ms Carlson,
ReplyDelete1. The name of my article that I read was, "How Many Orphans?"
2. The type of fallacy that was used was quantification fallacies.
3. A fallacy is a false statement that is presented into an article, and they would be given the wrong information.
4. The life of society will change because a lot of people will become very gullible. Then if we state false statements then, we don’t know the truth, and when the article states that 15,000 kids are orphaned with the result of 3,000 parents die. And times estimated that each love one is lost, their families had at least 5 children. Well I believe that every family has at least 2 children, and that doesn’t conclude to the 21st century families.
Sincerley
AJ Cummings
Period 3
Dear Ms.Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI chose to read the article titled CSI. I came to the conclusion that the article uses the fallacy known as a "Logical Fallacy."
The article shows a label with "Melatonin" on it, and right underneath the word says, "Clinically studied ingredient." When you see something like that, you must think that it means something good, like it's healthy. The truth is, it actually doesn't really "mean" anything. Of course it's telling you that the product was studied, but that doesn't mean it's healthy or safe to use, therefore it is illogical to place the words on the label. People might read the label and think it's good for them when it actually may not be. In this case, truth in advertising is vital. People need to be taking things that are good for them and that are actually certified healthy. If they continue using a "Logical Fallacy", people's health and maybe even lives will be at stake.
Sincerely,
Kailer Scopacasa
TO MS.CARLSON----PERIOD 1
DeleteDear Kailer,
DeleteI found that article a pretty interesting thing to read. Even though something is studied could mean the results of the study was bad, but all the advertisers put was it was just studied. There was no truth behind the study.
Sincerely,
Kalani Murakami Period 1
Dear Ms. Carlson
ReplyDeleteI chose to read the article "translation and scope". The fallacy of the article is the fallacy of it being ambiguous. When the fallacy is one that is ambiguous; it occurs when a word that is used that has two or more meanings to it. Like an example would be the word bright! as it can mean light that is given off and how smart someone is.
The article commits this fallacy as the word that is being translated has two meanings to it. The translation they used was "if you are stolen, please call the police" . The actual translation should be "if your possessions are stolen, please call the police.
If someone to believe this article they would be really confused. I would think that's kind of weird and might cause confusion as people would think that in that place it's natural to be "stolen" in that area. In Japanese as well as this Chinese writing they are many words that have different meanings. People with limited knowledge about the language will rely on these translations to get though the area in which they are in and if the sign is poorly translated then chaos will ensue.
Sincerely,
Kalani Murakami Period 1
Dear Kalani,
DeleteMy article was also about ambiguity. I think that your article was a little on the lighter side compared to mine, but it is surprising how many of the fallacies on here are about ambiguity with words with more than one meaning.
Sincerely
Casey Nakamura P1
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI read the article "Check It Out?" and from studing the article and reading through different fallacies, I believe the Logical Fallacy best represents the article.
The article shows that there is an ad for breast cancer tests that states that the earlier you get screened it is more likely for 5 year survival rates but it refers to the percentage of patients still alive five years after diagnosis of the disease. But if a disease is diagnosed earlier, more patients will survive at least five years after diagnosis even if they die at the same time. This is bad reasoning by trying to convince more people to come in for screening rather than telling the truth. Bad reasoning and error is the logical fallacy.
Sincerely,
Cody Palmer Period 2
Dear Ms. Carlson
ReplyDeleteThe article that I read was titled "CSI." The fallacy that I believe was being used was logical fallacy. This fallacy, to me, basically means a misinterpretation in reasoning. The phrase "Clinically Studied Ingredient" can be very misleading because people can just assume that this is something that is not harmful and because it has been studied it is okay to use. But most people probably don't even know what this phrase really means and they have to believe that the doctors and scientists creating the products are not lying to them or being misleading, and trust that this product is safe to use.
Sincerely, Nikki Ramos Period 1
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI decided to read the article "CSI". Now I have always been a victim of Logical Fallacy. Such a fallacy takes a viewers eyes and makes it see what it whats to see, not what is actually there. For example, I see that so and so liked this product and it was doctor recommended and blah blah blah so my first indication is to buy it because if its all "clinically tested" and such then there shouldn't be any reason not to get it right? Wrong. It is the job of the consumer to pay attention to the facts and identify if it is or is not what is usable and healthy.
Sincerly,
Peter Sizelove - Period 1
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteAfter reading most of the given articles , I made a decision and chose the article “ A Gee- Whiz Graph”. The type of fallacy I think that is being used in the article is false precision, it gave misleading information. The article showed a picture of a bar graph on ‘if Bush cuts expire’, and the graph seemed misleading in some ways, such as
1) the graph doesn’t start at the number zero it starts on 34%
2) the actual rate increase is only 4.6% from 35% to 39.6% but it appears that the top rate will increase to nearly six times the current rate
So for this reason, the graph is portraying information that people will think is a big outcome but really its just an illusion that seems accurate and intriguing.
Respectfully,
Jeric Manzano Pd: 3
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe the article I chose to do was called, "Charts & Graphs". The type of fallacy that was used in this article is known as ambiguity. The fallacy ambiguity is the ability to express one or more interpretations. If people were to believe what they read when analyzing the chart, they would be ambiguous to whether the height or the area of the pig represented said amounts.
Respectfully,
Brooke Spencer- Period 1
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteI chose the article "Poisoning of The Well", this is commonly referred to as a logical fallacy. The term "poisoning of the well" was used in the dark ages during the time when the black plague was suffocating Europe. The myth behind it is that the plague was being caused by Jews poisoning town wells, ultimately giving people and excuse to persecute them. I believe this term means ruining or tampering with an important thing. The water in the well was a resource that helped sustain a large group of people, and when ruined, everyone suffered. The implication of the fallacy if people were to believe it they'd feel anger towards the Jews for tampering with their water.
Respectfully,
Madisson Hinkel-Pd. 1
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteThe article I selected was "All Apologies." It was about the now-infamous comment made by Hillary Rosen, who stated on her twitter feed that Ann Romney, wife of Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, has "never worked a day in her life."
The author of the blog described how this could be considered a fallacy of ambiguity depending on the intent of the statement, which he was unable to confirm. Because the word "work"has two commonly accepted definitions and one of them could fit the situation, Rosen's comment could have been a fallacy of ambiguity in not choosing a more specified term.
Basically, I think this fallacy means that you fail to make yourself clear in communication in any way. The intent to deceive does not necessarily even need to be present for this fallacy to occur, though it is a good and often-used tool for those who do indeed intent to deceive.
People have interpreted this comment in every possible way since it was highly published, televised, and permeated the internet community. Some agree with Rosen, while most people are indignant on behalf of Mrs. Romney, who does work with several charitable organizations including her Church, and who responded by saying that raising children is "the most important thing we can do." As a mother of five, she chose her career to be raising her children. I could write another paragraph about the political implications on this comment as it touches on women's rights, the economy, and the election, but that would take way too long. I've done my best to put it into a nutshell.
Sincerely,
Casey Nakamura Period 1
Dear Ms. Carlson,
ReplyDeleteSmalls argument is that children need to learn how to cook and make good decisions about the food they eat. People of this century are far to busy to worry about a simple issue as “food” and its effects on what we consume so often people don’t know what is really happening when they eat out, “pop some pizza into the microwave”, or go for some cheap fast food at McDonalds. I fully agree that food consumption is an important issue that needs to be taught to children at schools because it just isn’t being taught in households as the adults are working so much.
The root of all problems is money of course. And time. Our whole system is revolved around money and the time spent on gaining it for survival is our top priority. That’s why the saying “time is money” has become so popular. The issue of money is relative to the issue of the size of the human population today. It has grown so greatly that looking for jobs are becoming harder and harder to find, and not only is that the issue, but its harder to earn a good salary. Often do families have to work several jobs just to maintain a good income, and this is why parents don’t have the time to prepare healthy meals as small says, and also not enough time to teach their children how to cook.
Another root of the problem is politics. Politics seek ways to get as much money as possible and as easily as possible. And these ways don’t always benefit us as they make it seem. The media is used to make quick, already made food a much better choice for our consumption. It looks good and harmless from the outside, so much more appealing that we don’t consider what’s inside, and where the food comes from.
Many of the foods we eat are FAKE. It’s loaded with preservatives, dyes, chemicals and so forth. But we don’t pay attention to how serious eating these already-made foods are, and the importance of eating healthier and making the food ourselves. Politicians control pricing, making the healthy, good food more expensive than the fast-food.
continue...
ReplyDeleteOf course people will favor the fast-food; they’ll save a few bucks.
These already- made meals are causing health problems such as obesity and heart issues. The more popular this already-made food becomes, so does the health issues.
Not only does it ruin our health greatly, it ruins the environment as the corn crops that take over require more pesticides, fossil and chemicals in the production, which then are being vastly exposed to the environment.
This issue is widespread and impacting our lives greatly, so people should have more awareness of the foods they eat, especially children who are just as clueless about the issue as the adults are. Teaching children how to cook and make smart decisions about the food they buy, will reduce health care costs and will extend their lifespan. Cooking and knowing what exactly you are eating are essential in survival, so it’s important enough of an issue to have classes in school that teach it.
Our ancestors survived with fewer issues in health and environment because they prepared their own food, using the natural foods instead of the artificial foods we create. We were fooled into thinking what we eat isn’t important, and our priorities revolving around money is what ruined us as a society. Its about time we stop this epidemic and get updated on our food consumption, because we as people have the right to know what we are eating, and making a little time to educate the children on what is the right foods to eat and why is crucial in the future of our people
Respectfully,
Jalissa Rapozo-Carveiro pd.3