Philosophy

Philosophy

Name:

Institution:

Philosophy

Part 1

In the parking garage scenario, I chose the route due to the beliefs and fear with respect to the outcome that would follow my decision. I decided to use the stairwell with the loudest students. The parking garage scene, it required absolute testing of the mental strength according to the reception at hand, without minimal consideration from the onset. According to the fallacious reasoning that accompanied the scenario, the arguments and patterns had faulty and wrong motives in the constructions of the arguments. For example, the parking required specialized persons and hence the need to address the need to stick closer to the students. It also ensured that I was near my car all the while, while in the last stage, the opportunity to surpass many variables could not ensure that I was safe or able to make a logical decision.

I did notice that I had preconceptions about people as they led to problematic inferences all the while. The loud students had the preconception of safety and security for my passage to my car as well as exit from the scenario. The sense of their presence would ensure that I would be guaranteed of safety in the setting without any disruption. There was no chance of hostility despite the apparent preconception of the students. Secondly, the elevator with the creepy person created the preconception that there would be interference from all the possible leads in the setting. The preconception was responsible for adjudging the person in the elevator as capable of causing disruption in the setting without any warning. Lastly, the unknown variables in the scenario could not allow my preconception to change on the negativity.

Different perceptions and situations are responsible for the creation of problematic inferences. In the fallacious reasoning, the validity of the arguments ensures that there are no statements gained from differing situations. The perceptions are tasked with facilitating the judgment on the scenario due to the weight of the matter at hand. For example, I did not realize by taking into consideration the perceptions of the people it changed the outcome of my choice in the parking garage. If the scenario permitted the kids in the noisy situation, probably they were having their own free time and wanted to enjoy as such. In the elevator, the person was only alone, and it was circumstantial. In the final excerpt, with the information at hand, the longest route could not influence the perception, as I had to be inclined to making a safe and wise statement.

Part 2

In the buying car scenario, I felt that the salesperson had ulterior motives since he used the judgment clouded on looks and developed the societal norms associated with his stature. The preconceptions in the salesperson’s thinking and fallacious reasoning enabled the baffled thought according to racial background. They led him to have biases towards me, and the purchase I intended to carry out at the time. The ulterior motives were generated from the argumentative basing of classes, racial and ethnical background as well as the surety from the approach regarding history as he was from another race. Therefore, he did not see any value in my presence when purchasing the car, and instead focused on the negative approach to thwarting me off from the premise. It was uncalled for as well as unnecessary at the time.

There are various biases that I face in real life, due to my racial background. They are dependent on the situational occurrence and setting from day to day basis and shift into historical inferences. For example, the neighboring persons from divergent backgrounds always have the same categorization based on racial provocations. As such, any instance of insecurity leads to them treating me with contempt on the issue. Regarding the perceptions held at the various settings, I am the first intent on suspicion. Another setting is that of racial profiling done by the authorities in service. Whenever there are incidents of the breaking of the law and regulations, the interrogation and interviews done are longer on the racial divide. It is not guaranteed on other races from time to time as the historical and motives to their actions are not judged accordingly.

I become an interested party to certain questions when they are reminiscent of the intended purpose due to biases. The degree of the argument and raised validity is subject to questioning, as it is not applied equally to all persons, regardless of their stature and background it facilitates the potential clouding of judgment on a personal level. For example, in the buying car scenario, the salesperson’s tone and depiction clouded my judgment as it made me realize that he was biased and racist at the same time. One is not supposed to have fallacious reasoning on people depending on their appearances and racial divide. It negates their importance and regard in the society. The stereotyping and discrimination borrows its value from such occurrences in the real world creating divisions and disunity.