They were useful because they
explained multiple ways of how to define a prediction. In mission critical was
very useful because they provided more about what can be proven with facts
leading to a stronger prediction. The website provided a lot of questions and
as more facts were recorded into the answer the higher the prediction was
coming true. In casual argument most of it was based on what could have
happened more assumption to make a stand. There are many sides to the reason
why things happen and they just provided many ways in why it could happen.
There are not many facts more like something that people observe in one point
of view. Not much hard facts and everything is based on a judgment. Therefore I
believe mission critical was most useful because it provided hard facts in the
argument.
I had a similar experience in high school. I was one of those people that was quick to judge someone based on my first impression of them. Just like how you said that you assumed that one guy in your class did not like you because he seemed really grumpy and had a mean look on his face. I assumed that one of the girls I met at the orientation for my high school was a mean person because of the way she acted. Its weird how sometimes people you assume are bad or something make a way back into your life and you can reassess your opinion on them. In a way, it is hard to not jump to conclusions about someone based on things you hear or see.
ReplyDelete