GONZALES, CHARISE A.

WEEK 4 - Reflective Journal

The reflective journal is a weekly written essay of one or more matters/ideas that you think is/are
important learning at the end of the weekly lecture in Argumentation and Debate. Answer the
guide questions below:
I. ARGUMENTATION IN EVERYDAY LIFE
Reflect and think of moments/situations (YOU ARE REQUIRED TO GIVE THREE) when you
were involved in an argument in your personal or professional life, past or present. For each
moment/situation, describe the argument by stating the following: (Note that letters b-e refer to
the essential ingredients of an argument)
a. Where did the argument take place? Who were involved in the argument?
1. The argument happened at FEU NRMF College of Nursing.
The persons involved were students for debate activity
2. The argument happened at home.
The persons involved were my parents and I.
3. The argument happened at work.
The persons involved were my workmate and I.
b. What was the issue?
1. The issue was about burnout of family members taking care of confined patients.
2. The issue was about whether or not I will continue studying Medicine.
3. The issue was about change of work shift time.
c. What was your position on said issue?
1. My position was that the family members experience burn-out.
2. My position was that I want to study Law.
3. My position was that I want to have a morning work shift.
d. What was your reason for that position?
1. My reason for my position is that, I should comply because I was assigned to debate
for my team.

2. My reason for that position is that, my sister was already studying Medicine, so why
not study Law so eventually we can have a lawyer in the family.
3. My reason was that I have to change work time shift to compensate for my law
school.
e. What evidences did you present to support your reason?
1. The pieces of evidence used were medical journals, medical books, and
statements for notable authors in the medical field.
2. The pieces of evidence used were my license as a Registered Nurse in the
United States and my Masters degree which I can use in the Medical field. To
study law could make me broaden my horizon as a legal nurse in the USA.
3. The pieces of evidence used were my certificate of matriculation, my school
identification card, my study load, my receipts of enrollment that my schedule
in work will be in conflict with my studies of Bachelor of Law degree.
f. Were you able to convince and persuade the person you were arguing with? Why or why not?
1. Yes. We won the silver medal. Why? Because we did our research and
presented it properly to the panel of Medical Doctors.
2. Yes. My parents supported me for the first 2 years of my studies of Law, even
if it is far from the pre-law course of Bachelors of Science in Nursing.
Thereafter, I was able to find a suitable job, so now, through Gods grace, I am
able to pay for my expense and tuition fee.
3. My officemates did not believe me at first. Eventually, they accepted the fact
that I want to study law while working.
II. GROUP DISCUSSION
Reflect on the activity that we had last Saturday, where you were tasked to discuss and
answer, as a group, certain questions posed.
a. What was the group dynamic like in your group?
Group dynamics is the interpersonal processes that take place in the group. The
tendency to join with others in groups is perhaps the most important characteristic of
humans.

In our group discussion, we were an interactive group, since we get into

arguments, talk over issues and make decisions. We were all speakers and listeners. We
were united even if majority of us met for the first time.
b. What role did you play in the group discussion?
I was tasked to be the main speaker. I spoke most of the time since majority of my
group mates did not know the movie entitled 12 Angry Men, so I was tasked to narrate
the story for them and acted as the facilitator of the group in the first activity. Also, some
of my roles were, an information giver, an information seeker, and an encourager.
c. Did you argue? How was it resolved? Cite a specific instance. If there was no
argument, explain why not.
Yes. We argued to be able to formulate our answers. The specific instance was
whether or not an argument is persuasive. I suggested to the group that this should be our
answer for a change. They agreed instantly with big smiles on their faces. To my surprise
it was correct. Hence, the group was satisfied.
d. In your group, who did you like the most, in terms of group interaction, convincing and
persuasive power? Why?
I liked Ms Lumantas because she reported in front of the room using the board
impromptu style while expounding our answers.
e. Who did you like the least, in terms of group interaction, convincing and persuasive
power? Why?
Just to make it clear, all of the group members participated actively in the group
activity and would have very intelligent answers to share among the group members.
Majority of the group reported verbally. For purposes of answering this question, it will
be Ms.Breva because she was tasked to report but she said she was shy to talk in front.

f. Other reflections.
I enjoyed participating with my group, because even if the subject was three hours just
for an English class, my group was able to let time fly since I felt at ease participating with them.
III. LAST THOUGHTS
What makes an argument effective?
An argument is effective if you can assess the understanding level of a person. This is
called the norms of the person. There should be a meeting of consensual standards, behaviors and
same context.
What makes a person a good and effective arguer; may it be spoken or written, in personal and
professional (legal advocacy) life?
A person is a good arguer if he or she has the proper non-verbal communication skills
when it is in spoken form. In written form, he can be an effective arguer if he or she has good
grammar and presentation. For professional legal advocacy life, he or she can be effective if he
or she is empathic. Empathy means being able to feel what another person is feeling if you were
in the same position and condition with that person. In figure of speech, it is being in the shoes of
that person.