Power must be evil because it can corrupt people.
Apply the following in 350 to 500 words for each scenario:
j. Power must be evil because it can corrupt people.
k. If the theory of evolution is true, as scientific evidence overwhelmingly suggests, a human being is nothing more than an ape.
b. Low grades on a college transcript are a handicap in the job market, so teachers who grade harshly are doing students a disservice.
Evaluate each argument, using the 4-step process described on p. 218, regarding soundness of reasoning (truth and validity).
• Explain your assessment and add alternative argumentation where necessary.
4-step process
1. State your argument fully, as clearly as you can. Be sure to identify any hidden premises and, if the agument is complex, to express all parts of it.
2. Examine each part of your argument for errors affecting truth. (To be sureyour examination is not perfunctory, play devil’s advocate and challenge
the argument, asking pointed questions about it, taking nothing for granted.)
Note any instances of either/or thinking, avoiding the issue, overgeneralizing,oversimplifying, double standard, shifting the burden of proof, or irrational appeal. In addition, check to be sure that the argument reflects the evidence found in your investigation (see Chapter 8) and is relevant to the pro and con arguments and scenarios you produced earlier (see
Chapter 9).
3. Examine your argument for validity errors; that is, consider the reasoning that links conclusions to premises. Determine whether your conclusion is
legitimate or illegitimate.
4. If you find one or more errors, revise your argument to eliminate them. The changes you will have to make in your argument will depend on the kinds
of errors you find. Sometimes, only minor revision is called for—the adding of a simple qualification, for example, or the substitution of a rational appeal for an irrational one. Occasionally, however, the change required is more dramatic. You may, for example, find your argument so flawed that the only appropriate action is to abandon it altogether and embrace adifferent argument. On those occasions, you may be tempted to pretend
your argument is sound and hope no one will notice the errors. Resist that hope. It is foolish as well as dishonest to invest time in refining a view that
you know is unsound.
Format your paper consistent with APA guidelines.
Apply the following in 350 to 500 words for each scenario:
j. Power must be evil because it can corrupt people.
k. If the theory of evolution is true, as scientific evidence overwhelmingly suggests, a human being is nothing more than an ape.
b. Low grades on a college transcript are a handicap in the job market, so teachers who grade harshly are doing students a disservice.
Evaluate each argument, using the 4-step process described on p. 218, regarding soundness of reasoning (truth and validity).
• Explain your assessment and add alternative argumentation where necessary.
4-step process
1. State your argument fully, as clearly as you can. Be sure to identify any hidden premises and, if the agument is complex, to express all parts of it.
2. Examine each part of your argument for errors affecting truth. (To be sureyour examination is not perfunctory, play devil’s advocate and challenge
the argument, asking pointed questions about it, taking nothing for granted.)
Note any instances of either/or thinking, avoiding the issue, overgeneralizing,oversimplifying, double standard, shifting the burden of proof, or irrational appeal. In addition, check to be sure that the argument reflects the evidence found in your investigation (see Chapter 8) and is relevant to the pro and con arguments and scenarios you produced earlier (see
Chapter 9).
3. Examine your argument for validity errors; that is, consider the reasoning that links conclusions to premises. Determine whether your conclusion is
legitimate or illegitimate.
4. If you find one or more errors, revise your argument to eliminate them. The changes you will have to make in your argument will depend on the kinds
of errors you find. Sometimes, only minor revision is called for—the adding of a simple qualification, for example, or the substitution of a rational appeal for an irrational one. Occasionally, however, the change required is more dramatic. You may, for example, find your argument so flawed that the only appropriate action is to abandon it altogether and embrace adifferent argument. On those occasions, you may be tempted to pretend
your argument is sound and hope no one will notice the errors. Resist that hope. It is foolish as well as dishonest to invest time in refining a view that
you know is unsound.
Format your paper consistent with APA guidelines.
0 comments:
Post a Comment