MKTG 425 1nd EditionExam # 1 Study Guide Lectures: 1 - 16Introduction Chapter:Sustainability: sustainability refers to how biological systems remain diverse and productive. Long-lived and healthy wetlands and forests are examples of sustainable biological systems. In more general terms, sustainability is the endurance of systems and processes.Sweet spot of triple bottom line: People, Planet, ProfitSustainability campaigns:-Two types of “hot” sustainability - Survival of the firm- Survival of the planet** We want to focus on strategies that see these as highly tied to each other—not balancing or trading but maximizing. Conservation terms: - Water efficient vs water saving- Sacrifice current lifestyle- People are directly opposed to natureCompany Rankings:-Many trend point to the importance of sustainability in business Measures: -Dow jones sustainability world index annually ranks publicially held companies by three criteria:1. Long term financial stability2. Social responsibility3. Environmental plansEnvironmental performance index: a report released every two years that ranks the nations according to environmental performance. Perceptions of green products: The US consumer needs benefits—better performance, more convenience--- not always green Consumers can view green products as insufficient Lower quality May perceive products as more expensive They may assume built in costs to produce a product in a sustainable manner Expensive materials Materials that are not mainstream or a major manufactured items5 R’s1. Reduce –Emissions & consumption2. Reuse-conserve products3. Recycle4. Redesign5. ReimagineAssessing the Validity arguments Chapter: What makes a good argument?1. Good Premises: - The facts that justify. They must be relevant and true- Your conclusion/viewpoint/position on the issue is supported by premises- Address all the important & relevant parts of issue- Strong conclusion Aristotle’s law of noncontradiction-Nothing can be so and not so at the same timeInductive reasoning: From a particular instance to a general theory. You observe something happening andthen develop a theory- Must have the ability to be proven false-test theory Fallacies:Formal Fallacy: something is wrong with the schema or structure of the argument-Two types of formal fallacies:1. A false premise2. The argument is irrelevant or circular Check your sources using the CRAAP test:-Currency: The timeliness of the information-Relevance: The importance of the information for your needs-Authority: The source of the information-Accuracy: The reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of the content-Purpose: The reason the information existsCommon Fallacies:Alleged Certainty– Stating something that may not have support, but using terms that make it appear certain– Using loaded /emotional terms• Unconscionable – Confident manner– Louder – Repeated assertionPost Hoc—false cause• People with ebola who go to the hospital die. The act of going to the hospital reduces your chancesof beating the disease. Oversimplification– Blaming a single person / event / moment• The financial collapse of 2008 was caused by greedy investors flipping homes.Slippery slope– Implies there is no way to stop once you start• If we allow the EPA to regulate the auto emissions (CAFÉ) and diesel, then what is to keep EPA from banning SUVs for personal use?Tradition– Always have/ Never haveAd Populum—– speak from emotion (being patriotic, avoiding terrorism) rather than from the issue– Only crazy tree-huggers would bring their own bag to the grocery store.Misrepresenting authority– Lifting statements out of context• E.g., sarcasm being used, but can’t tell from the quoteWeak analogy– Banning a particular pesticide because it increases cancer risk is like banning automobiles because they kill people• Missing discussion of substitutes, disruption of economy & societyAppeal to authority – Johnny Depp supports the 2nd Amendment rights to bear arms.Bad seed / connections / bad person (Ad Populum and tu quoque)– Obama is “palling around with terrorist who would target their own country” William Ayers, terrorist. Friendship– You are my friend, you should support my opinion.Pity– Feel bad for me and change your mind; my 21st B-day and I have did not do well on the testSimple diversion (a red herring)– Sure, we are finding unsafe levels of mercury in tuna—but how will fishing families take care of themselves if we regulate it?Straw Man– the opponent's view that does not address the argument– People who support Affordable Health Care act are socialists.False dichotomy– Make it look like there are only two choices: – You can either stop drinking bottled water or destroy EarthTrivial objections– Assume any objection to the argument makes it unsoundThe end justifies the meansMisleading percentages or totals– How To Lie with StatisticsQuietism– Nobody complains therefore nobody suffers?– Popular Opinion– 63% of Americans believe the climate is changingCreating doubts– Push polling??– Efficacy of timeHasty generalizations– From a small sample (incident) to all• Bankruptcy is primarily caused by frivolous spending• Accident– Rules apply uniformly without exception to extenuating circumstances– -zero tolerance on knifes at schools or “underage” sexAvoiding fallacies:1. Argue the other side of all your ideas2. Look specifically for theses fallacies and eliminate them3. List your main points and then list the facts that back them upGreen House Gases Chapter:Supreme court: - Greenhouse gasses are pollutants thus covered under the clean air act- EPA must investigate whether or not greenhouse gasses may “reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare”- If they do, then EPA is compelled to regulate greenhouse gassesFYI: Greenhouse gasses work like the ceiling of a greenhouse in that the gasses trap solar heat. There are six gasses-Carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydroflourocarbons, perflourcarbons, and sulfurhexafloride.Two things to regulate greenhouse gasses legally:1. There is a strong level of science supporting the premise that human activity affects global warming2. That global warming may be “reasonably anticipated to endanger public health or welfareScience:- Three meta analyses of hundreds of studies- Half a century of warming when natural forces predict cooling-