Chapter Two of Dan Ariely’s “Predictability Irrational”

In Chapter Two of Dan Ariely's "Predictability Irrational", the main points that he makes are that most of the time we have no idea about the value of certain products, but the main force that drives us to actually make purchases in the price tag on the item. Ariely's main points made in this chapter refer to the buyers perception of a specific product and not necessarily basing off of similar products prices or the competitions prices. He then goes on to discuss the idea of anchoring and how prices can be imprinted into our minds for various products. When that price is seen by consumers the first time, they believe that it may be the same price for the same product in other areas, therefore they may not have the desire to go search for a cheaper price.  People tend to pay a certain price for a product when they're first exposed to it, and this is the main force that drives anchoring. Ariely says that we shouldn't necessarily believe the first price we see on a product is going to be the same for the same product at a different store. He says that we should question ourselves and can't be so vulnerable to companies charging outrageous prices for their products. The idea of supply and demand is also brought up by Ariely, as he says that the demand for products tend to be more high then the supply, therefore companies can charge whatever price they want for a product and tend to get away with it.

The point this chapter makes is that most of the time we have no idea of the inherent value of a certain product and what we’re willing to pay for it depends on lots of things, but the first price tag associated with that product has a decisive role. - See more at: http://zsoltbabocsai.org/dan-ariely-predictably-irrational/#sthash.tTm5P81x.dpuf

The point this chapter makes is that most of the time we have no idea of the inherent value of a certain product and what we’re willing to pay for it depends on lots of things, but the first price tag associated with that product has a decisive role. - See more at: http://zsoltbabocsai.org/dan-ariely-predictably-irrational/#sthash.tTm5P81x.dpuf

The point this chapter makes is that most of the time we have no idea of the inherent value of a certain product and what we’re willing to pay for it depends on lots of things, but the first price tag associated with that product has a decisive role. - See more at: http://zsoltbabocsai.org/dan-ariely-predictably-irrational/#sthash.tTm5P81x.dpuf

The point this chapter makes is that most of the time we have no idea of the inherent value of a certain product and what we’re willing to pay for it depends on lots of things, but the first price tag associated with that product has a decisive role. - See more at: http://zsoltbabocsai.org/dan-ariely-predictably-irrational/#sthash.tTm5P81x.dpuf

The point this chapter makes is that most of the time we have no idea of the inherent value of a certain product and what we’re willing to pay for it depends on lots of things, but the first price tag associated with that product has a decisive role. - See more at: http://zsoltbabocsai.org/dan-ariely-predictably-irrational/#sthash.tTm5P81x.dpuf

Believing and Doubting Summary

In Peter Elbow’s “Believing and Doubting” the new idea of the doubting and believing games are brought up. Elbow begins by introducing how he came about with the idea of the doubting game, where he defined it as being similar to critical thinking that's the disciplined practice of trying to be as skeptical as possible with every idea we encounter. He stated that is it the opposite of the believing game,where we're disciplined through practice of trying to be as accepting or welcoming to every idea that we encounter. Elbow goes on to say that we honor systematic skepticism or the doubting game as the best form of thinking. It’s easy to doubt what’s perceived, but the whole point of systematic skepticism is to try to doubt what we find most obvious or true or right.

Chapter 2 of The Undercover Economist

In Chapter 2 of "The Undercover Economist," Harford explains that supply and demand isn't the only reason why people pay high prices. Hartford starts off the chapter using the London Eye as an example of scarcity power because it is a unique landmark, but it's also something that's optional. Hartford stated, "Everywhere you look around the Eye you can see vendors with scarce resources, trying to exploit that scarcity. Costa Coffee is the only coffee bar in the immediate area, for instance (page 31)." Hartford says that people can choose to not go to the London Eye, but because it's there and it's so unique, it draws people to pay money to be able to go. Hartford also brings in the idea that supermarkets have bought into the idea of price targeting.  He says that, "Above the main concourse of London’s Liverpool Street station, there’s a Marks and Spencer “Simply Food” store, catering to busy commuters on the way in and out of London (page 40)." This idea is prevalent to his main idea in his writing because he talks a lot about how important it is to have a good location if you're a retailer. Having a market right in this specific area, it can provide the retailers for a much better advantage when consumers come by because there are thousands of people who pass by every single day. 

Chapter 1 of Undercover Economist

In Chapter One of Tim Harford’s book, “The Undercover Economist,” the idea of strength of scarcity and why retailers have the ability to over charger consumers is explored in the chapter. Hartford goes into detail in this chapter by beginning to discuss the daily lives of a commuter and how they're all exposed to retailers along the way. For example, Hartford discusses the step by step process of being a consumer, saying how commuters will get off the train and will go to the local Starbucks because it's right next to the stop. Location is key in this situation, and Hartford goes into detail about why location plays such a pivotal role in making a profit as a retailer. Hartford stated, "Yet commutes also produce common patterns—bottlenecks and rush hours—that are exploited by entrepreneurs the world over (page 5)." Hartford also talks about the role that competition plays when you're a retailer and also the role it plays in over charging consumers. He says how when a resource is tougher to come by, then the competition to get that item will be much tougher. This ultimately allows retailers to overcharge for items and it's tough for the consumers because of the hole it burns in their pockets.  When looking at this idea when it relates to a college degree, I believe that just because you have a college degree, doesn't necessarily mean you'll be able to get a job. For me personally, my goal is to become a sports anchor/reporter for television and the job market is extremely tough. Just because you may have a degree, doesn't mean you'll get a job right out of college.

Greene's Argument as Conversation Summary

SUMMARY:
 The main point that I took away after reading Stuart Greene's Argument as Conversation was the specific ways in which arguments can guide a conversation. For a lot of people, arguments can be seen as a negative aspect if it were to happen between people during a conversation, but Greene eloquently articulated the ways in which arguments can be used to inform and educate people. Greene also brings up questions for people to think about when entering a conversation in which you're developing an argument. Greene brought up three key points that are crucial when developing an argument, such as being able to identify the issue, identify the situation, and frame a good question that's specific enough to "guide inquiry" (13). These three topics presented by Greene are important because they're all building blocks towards developing your point. If you can identify the issue, that leads to being able to identify the situation, which can then lead to helping you frame a good question. The article also goes into detail about being able to frame, where Greene describes framing as a metaphor in relation to perspective for the writers to present their arguments.

QUESTIONS:
1.) What role, according to Greene, does reading play in the kind of writing you will be asked to do in college?

The role that reading plays in the kind of writing we're asked to do in college is rather significant according to Greene because learning how to write a research argument is viewed as a process of learning how to enter conversations that are already going on in written form. He talks about how the the concept of writing in dialogue is important, not only between the author and reader, but for being able to take that concept into real life conversation. For writers, they want the stuff they're writing to be in conversation format because it makes the reader feel more engaged.

2.) Explain the concept of framing. What metaphor underlies it? Why is the concept important for Greene? What does framing allow writers to do?

Greene goes into great detail about the concept of framing. Framing is a metaphor for describing the lens or perspective from which writers present their arguments. Greene uses the metaphor of taking a picture and blurring out the unimportant details, emphasizing a specific moment he wanted to capture. Greene says that framing really plays a significant role in writing and helps develop ideas, along with providing important details on what's being written. This concept of framing is crucial for writers because it allows them to get their message across to an audience, in a way that they feel should be done.

Summary of Intertextuality: How Texts Rely on Other Texts

A key point the Bazerman made in this article was the concept of intertextuality, which refers to the relation each text has to the texts surrounding. I've usually had an understanding of what type of information I should use in my arguments to help back up my points, and the concept of intertextuality goes well with that. Bazerman also goes on to talk about how ideas are similar to a web of connections and how there can be a bunch of thoughts moving around your head. Bazerman goes on to discuss the techniques of intertextual representation, discussing topics such as direct and indirect quotations used in text.

Socrates Quotes/General Ignorance and TED Talk Pursuit of Ignorance

 Socrates Quotes
 The Socrates quote, "The unexamined life is not worth living" has always been one that was intriguing to me because of the significance it has in such few words. The tone of the language behind the words, "not worth living" is what mainly stands out for me because it raised the question of whether or not a certain type of lifestyle is one that's not worth living? I feel that the only way we can thoroughly answer this quote by Socrates would be by looking at life through our own thoughts and ideas, and not anyone else's. It's about reflecting upon and evaluating our own personal thoughts, beliefs, and perspectives because it's those core values that shape each and every person. To look at life through another person's lens would be extremely difficult because who are we to to judge other people's practices and evaluate their lives? There's a lot more to people than we can see through our eyes, and it does society no help by judging everybody.

The next quote by Socrates, "To know, is to know that you know nothing", is one that also stood out to me. In my opinion, what Socrates meant by this quote is that the only way we can be true learners is by opening up our minds and realizing when we're wrong, so that we can learn from our mistakes. There's no way that we can learn if we think that we know everything already, which is absolutely impossible. Instead of holding ourselves to such a high standard of being an so called 'expert' on every topic, a wise person would admit that he or she doesn't know something, therefore allowing themselves to be educated.

General Ignorance and TED Talk Pursuit of Ignorance
According to Firestein, we can get students to step outside the boundaries of facts by putting into their minds that those who are able to get comfortable with uncomfortable topics will be the ones who reap the biggest benefits. The reasons why students don't always step outside the boundaries of facts is because they're afraid to challenge those thoughts and ideas. A lot of students don't feel comfortable stepping outside those boundaries of facts because facts are usually what drives beliefs.
For students to pursuit ignorance, they can't be afraid to ask the questions that go against the facts that are presented in everyone's daily lives. According to Lloyd, experts, specialists, and institutions are nervous about admitting ignorance because higher ups in the world don't want to be associated with ignorance. We can get people to deal with difficult or troubling ideas that challenge our beliefs by first identifying the belief and then searching for ways in which we can challenge it. A quote that stood out for me from the Firestein video was the one by Marie Curie where she said, "One never notices what has been done, one can only see what remains to be done..." This stood out to me because when you look at the notion of challenging others ideas and beliefs, you can only achieve that goal if you look at what has to be done in order to get your point across. When Lloyd says information is always challenging, that doesn't necessarily mean that we can never really know anything because information can always be challenged. We can always go against information presented to us because that's what really allows us to be educated.

Of course, as Socrates demonstrated in his own life (and death) being fully human (in the sense sketched above) can be extremely challenging. In a world of abiding uncertainty and complexity one can recognise a certain attraction in not examining too much, for too long in life. - See more at: http://www.newphilosopher.com/articles/being-fully-human/#sthash.f7Hv1IWP.dpuf

Of course, as Socrates demonstrated in his own life (and death) being fully human (in the sense sketched above) can be extremely challenging. In a world of abiding uncertainty and complexity one can recognise a certain attraction in not examining too much, for too long in life. - See more at: http://www.newphilosopher.com/articles/being-fully-human/#sthash.f7Hv1IWP.dpuf

Of course, as Socrates demonstrated in his own life (and death) being fully human (in the sense sketched above) can be extremely challenging. In a world of abiding uncertainty and complexity one can recognise a certain attraction in not examining too much, for too long in life. - See more at: http://www.newphilosopher.com/articles/being-fully-human/#sthash.f7Hv1IWP.dpuf

"TThe unexamined life is not worth living