...Nicole P. Harrell-Lockhart November 6, 2011 Argument Evaluation Argument number 1 We might have accomplished if we had been a treat terrorist attacks of 9/11 in a way similar to how we treat the carnage on the nation’s highways by implementing practices and requirements that are directly related to results (as in the case of speed limits, safety belts , and the like, which took decades to accomplish in the cause of auto safety) rather than by throwing the nation into a near panic and using the resulting fears to justify expensive but not necessarily effective or even relevant measures. Outline of Argument Number 1 A. Conclusions 1.We could have accomplished If we had been able to treat terrorist attacks of 9/11 similar to how we treat the carnage on the highways on the nation’s highways by implementing practices and requirements(speed limits safety belts and the like, which took decades to accomplish in the cause of auto safety) B. Premises 1. Rather than throwing the nation into a near panic 2. And using the resulting fears to justify expensive but not necessarily effective or even relevant measures. Do the premises sufficiently support the conclusions? The premise does support the conclusion because if we had reacted to the 9/11...
Words: 744 - Pages: 3
...Quiz Review Outline “Critical thinking is the systematic evaluation or formulation of beliefs, or statements, by rational standards.” • It’s systematic because it involves distinct procedures and methods (not just gut feelings). • It’s used to evaluate existing beliefs and formulate new ones. • It evaluates beliefs in terms of how well they are supported by reasons. Key Terms: Assertion/Statement - A declarative sentence that is intended to make a claim of some sort. Sometimes these are called statements or propositions. eg.I am taller than you, It is raining, She will win the race. Premise- A statement that is offered in support of a conclusion Conclusion - A statement that is held to be supported by a premise or premises eg. All whales are mammals. Moby Dick is a whale. Moby Dick is a mammal. Argument- a set of statements one of which (the conclusion) is taken to be supported by the remaining statements (the premises). • The conclusion is what the speaker wants you to accept. • The premises state the reasons or evidence for accepting the conclusion. Inference- is the process of reasoning from a premise (or premises) to a conclusion (or conclusions) based on those premises. Explanation- tells you why something happened. Argument- tells you why you should believe something. • Arguments have something to prove; explanations do not. eg. 1. Adam stole the money, for three people saw him do it. 2. Adam stole the money because he needed to buy food...
Words: 1372 - Pages: 6
...My explanation: This argument committed the slippery slope fallacy in the sense that it is easy to buy a Green-Day album without going on to become a punk; However, I could purchase the album and equally stop there. The conclusion of this argument, therefore, hasn’t been proven, because the argument of my first premise is false. Hasty generalization: In my definition, Hasty generalization happens when we engage ourselves in a discussion and are trying to make a point. In this type of fallacy, we do not have the data available to prove something so we jump to conclusions and utilize the little information we have in other to demonstrate the point that we want to make. A hasty generalization event is treated as typical of a whole class. Furthermore, a conclusion is not logically justified by sufficient fact. Example: 1. Our English teacher made us read some poetry last year, and it was boring. I...
Words: 528 - Pages: 3
...Logical Fallacies Fallacies are common errors in reasoning that will undermine the logic of your argument. Fallacies can be either illegitimate arguments or irrelevant points, and are often identified because they lack evidence that supports their claim. Avoid these common fallacies in your own arguments and watch for them in the arguments of others. • o Slippery Slope: This is a conclusion based on the premise that if A happens, then eventually through a series of small steps, through B, C,..., X, Y, Z will happen, too, basically equating A and Z. So, if we don't want Z to occur, A must not be allowed to occur either. Example:If we ban Hummers because they are bad for the environment eventually the government will ban all cars, so we should not ban Hummers. In this example, the author is equating banning Hummers with banning all cars, which is not the same thing. o Hasty Generalization: This is a conclusion based on insufficient or biased evidence. In other words, you are rushing to a conclusion before you have all the relevant facts. Example: Even though it's only the first day, I can tell this is going to be a boring course. In this example, the author is basing his evaluation of the entire course on only the first day, which is notoriously boring and full of housekeeping tasks for most courses. To make a fair and reasonable evaluation the author must attend not one but several classes, and possibly even examine the textbook, talk to the professor, or talk...
Words: 1157 - Pages: 5
...Assignment Cover Sheet 200336 Business Academic Skills School of Business Student last name: | | Student first name: | | Student number: | | Unit name and number: | 200336 Business Academic Skills | Workshop day: | | Workshop time: | | Workshop room: | | Workshop tutor: | | Title of assignment: | Essay Development | Length: | 500 words plus references | Date due: | In Workshop Week 11 (beginning 7 October) | Date submitted: | | Campus enrolment: | | Declaration: * I hold a copy of this assignment if the original is lost or damaged. * I hereby certify that no part of this assignment or product has been copied from any other student’s work or from any other source except where due acknowledgement is made in the assignment. * No part of the assignment/product has been written/produced for me by any other person except where collaboration has been authorised by the subject lecturer/tutor concerned. * I am aware that this work may be reproduced and submitted to plagiarism detection software programs for the purpose of detecting possible plagiarism (which may retain a copy on its database for future plagiarism checking). * I am aware that the plagiarism detection software programs are not the only means that will be used to detect plagiarism (i.e. having a zero report may still result in plagiarism). Signature: ______________________________________ Note: An examiner or lecturer/tutor has the right to not...
Words: 1991 - Pages: 8
...Valid deductive argument: an argument in which assuming the premises are true, it is impossible for the the conclusion to be false, conclusion necessarily follows the premises. Invalid Deductive argument: argument in which the premises are true, it is possible for the argument to be false, conclusion doesn’t necessarily follow the premises. Sound Argument: When an argument is shown to be valid and all premises are true then it is sound. Unsound argument: when an argument is invalid or at least one of a valid arguments premises are false. Cogent Argument: An inductive argument is cogent when the argument is strong and the premises are true. Uncogent: an argument is un-cogent if either the argument is weak or it has at least one false premise. Strong Argument: given premises are true it is unlikely for conclusion to be false. Weak argument: argument is weak when assuming premises are true that it is likely the conclusion is false. Tautology: A statement that is necessarily true. “Ethan is tall or he is not tall”. Contingent Statement: statements that are either true or false, their truth tables have both true and false values. Non-contingent statement: statements thats truth values don’t depend on truth values of components. “Tautologies, self-contradictions”. Self-contradiction: a statement that is necessarily false. “2 is an even number and the number 2 is not an even number. Contradictory statements: statements that have opposing values on every line of their respective truth...
Words: 1530 - Pages: 7
...provided few examples about whether we should respect teenagers and adolescents medical decisions against their best interest. He also provided few steps to help parents if their children making improperly medical decisions that would threaten their best interest. In the following critical thinking essay, it will analysis the major topic that Dr Wilkinson mentioned and provided two sides evaluations, including strengths and fallacies in the article. Analysis Main arguments Based on analyzing the major topic about “Healthy case for letting doctors judge teen’s best interests”, Dr Wilkinson believed that we should respect adolescents’ medical decisions if it towards to their best interests. On the contrast, if their final decision is deemed as wrong, then the parents should decide what is the best for their child or teenager for long-term wellbeing. Therefore, the paternalism still exists in medicine and we should resist the trend to allow them control over medical decisions if their children made wrong decisions that put threats to their healthy issues (Wilkinson, 2008). To conclusion, the main argument from Dr Wilkinson’s topic is to respect younger patients’ opinions on their best interests and the paternalism still important in medicine. Three premises In the past, minors were not allowed to making medical decisions because of their age and incompetence, which will be the main reason that related to Dr Wilkinson’s article. The parents had authority...
Words: 1590 - Pages: 7
...quite challenging. Rest assured that the tute preparation load will be significantly lighter once we get to tutorial 5 (or soon after that if you are in a smaller tutorial group) and the tutorial presentations. Until then it’s necessary to do a bit of front loading, so to speak, to get you up and running with the text analysis methodologies which will stand you in good stead later in the semester. Once you have mastered these methodologies there will be significantly less theory and much more of an emphasis on actual journalistic coverage of events, people, issues and trends. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A guide to analysing views journalism Part 1 – characterising arguments by reference to the how they are justified and supported In the first section of these notes we are going to look in a bit more detail at how supporting argumentation (justifications) works to justify primary claims. This material was dealt with in previous tutes and lectures but now we go into more depth – specifically extending the discussion to consider the nature of the warrants which are typically associated with the different types of justification. By attending to warrants in this way it becomes possible to provide telling insights into the author’s persuasive style and into the value system or worldview which is taken for granted...
Words: 7920 - Pages: 32
...Part One: Analysis Assumptions Kelly Thomas - Senior Engineer, Product Development 4-6 Assumptions 1First and foremost, Kelly assumed that Pat, Director of Marketing, knew nothing about quality control. 2He also assumed that all the features for the retinal scanner could not be developed in the time frame allotted. 3The third assumption made by Kelly was that he assumed AcuScan would not have the staff to develop a new product because of lay-offs the previous year. 4Finally, he assumed Pat did not have the technological experience since his past experience was with the cereal business. Pat Lambert - Director of Marketing 6-9 Assumptions Pat is not without fault. 1His assumptions led him to believe that the new product would be a simple addition to the product line. 2He also assumed that the programmers had plenty of time to work on new product even with staff cuts in the previous year. 3His third assumption was that because others were not agreeing with him they were not committed to the new product. 4Pat assumed that the job could be done by outside contractors in the time frame called for. 5As with many project managers, Pat assumed a meeting would resolve all problems. 6As far as the customer is concerned, Pat assumed they would be happy with whatever product was developed and launched since AcuScan has been an industry leader for a decade. 7Finally, Pat assumed Kelly was against him since Kelly questioned his QC experience and knowledge. Cliff O'Connor...
Words: 2200 - Pages: 9
...Writing Essoy for Tests English Gobi Duigu @ Gabi Duigu 2002 All rightsreserved Revised and reprinted2003 Published AcademicEnglishPress by 9/13 ArmstrongStreet NS\f 2062 Cammeray Australia P h : 0 2 9 4 3 76 3 3 0 edu.au email: g.duigu@unsw. Distributed by: Melting Pot Press 10 Grafton Street NS\W2008 Chippendale Australia Ph: (61) 29212 1882 Fax:02 9211 1868 corn.au email:books@elt. ISBN:0-9578996-1-0 lntroduction StogeI TheQuestion . . . .3 the L Understonding Question ......3 1.1 The Instructions 1.2 Kev Terms 2. AnolysingtheQuestion... ......7 2 . 1F i n d i n g t h e F o c u s the 2.2 Understanding Context 2.3DefiningtheTerms . ..... '7 ' . . .8 .....10 ldeos ond Presenting Stoge2 Selecting 3, Findingldeos 3 . 1B r a i n s t o r m i n g 3.2 FindingMore Ideas 3.3UsingExamples 3.4The "'s7hatifNot"Situation 3.5 Looking at the Other Side . ldeos 4, Selecting 4 . 1S o l u t i o n s t o P r o b l e m s . .2Evaluation . . 4.3 Classificationof Ideas ....r3 ...14 . . . .15 ' '.... '17 '. '.. 'I7 . . .18 ......1e ......19 . . ' .20 . . . . . ' '21 4 . 4 T y p e so f C l a s s i f i c a t i o n 4.5 SelectingRelevantldeas 4.6Levelof Generalisation 4.7 OvergeneralisationsandExaggeration 5, Orgonisingldeos... 5.1 RankingIdeas 5.2Consequences 5.3Comparisons 5.4$ternatives.. 5.5Speculation.. ".... "23 .....25 ... "..26 .....28 ......3r . . .31 ...3I ...
Words: 19664 - Pages: 79
...Minimizing Interruptions Facts: Although some interruptions are signs of involvement and interest, and other s are genuine requests for information, interruptions are rarely appreciated. When you cut others off, the speaker thinks that you don’t care about their ideas or that you believe your ideas are better than theirs. When you interrupt, you may be perceived as rude, egocentric and controlling – someone who believes that what you have to say is more important than other’s ideas. Strategies on how to cut back interrupting: Count to three after the speaker seems to be finished. Concentrate on what the speaker is saying then paraphrase it back when he/she is finished. When you catch yourself interrupting, apologize and ask the speaker to continue. Ask another co-worker to count the number of times you interrupt in a day. Opportunistic Listening Look for Main and Supporting Points Sometimes it is appropriate to ask politely for the speaker’s thesis. E.g. “I’m trying to pull together what you’ve been telling me about the problems you’ve been, having meeting your quotas. Could you summarize for me?” At other times, however, it isn’t appropriate to ask the speaker outright. “Over all, then, would you say your division is losing its market share?” Take Notes You are unlikely to remember every deadline, every comment or even every topic in a meeting...
Words: 1315 - Pages: 6
...Axia College Material Appendix E Critical Analysis Forms Fill out one form for each source. Source 1 Title and Citation: Mangano, Philip F Government Initiatives Can Reduce Homelessness Opposing Viewpoints: The Homelessness. Ed. Louise Gerdes. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2007 Opposing Viewpoint Resource Center. Gale. Appolo Library-Univ of Phoenix. 31 Jan.2010 http://find.galegroup.com.ezproxy.appollolibrary.com/ovrc/retrieve.do?subjectParam=Locale%2528en%252c%252c%2529%25AFQE%253D2528su%252CNone%252C14%2529%2522Homelessness%2522%2524&sort=Relevance&tabId=T010&sgCurrentPosition=O&subjectAction=DISPLAY_SUBJECT&prodId=OVR&searchId=R3&docId=EJ3010235253¤tPosition+3&bucketSubId=&userGroupName=uphoenix&docLevel=&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&sgHitCountType=None&qrySerId=Locale%28en%2C%2C%29%3AFQE%3D%28SU%2CNone%2C14%29%22Homelessness%22Homelessness%22%24&inPS=true&searchType=BasicSearchForm&nav=next#sourceCitation | | 1 | Identify the principal issue presented by the source. | The principle issue is that a small group of homeless are using the most of the government resources, and that there needs to be a change in policy (Mangano 2007). | 2 | Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this. | The author uses facts about homelessness, and the government’s plan to help solve chronic homelessness. The author shows how the homeless use more than...
Words: 1541 - Pages: 7
...and design history and to see how artists exist and work within artistic and social contexts that help shape their work. • To develop your academic research, writing and referencing skills, in preparation for university and work. • To inspire you and allow you to then make better, more well-informed, practical work, that discusses complex issues and sophisticated concepts. Format • A written and illustrated final outcome of 3000 words with 10% tolerance. • No shorter than 2700 and no longer than 3300. • Fully illustrated by you. • Presented visually. • Related to your practical work • Includes evidence of contextual research; critical analysis; critical interpretation; personal response and engagement; and critical evaluations and judgements • It is an essential component of your A2 year but it is NOT worth more marks than the practical element. Title • Design an essay title that will allow you to make a critical and evaluative conclusion. • Consider the following examples. Which ones will result in the better A level essays? Why do you think this is? Title examples • Lucian Freud: A Study of His Life and Works • Justify the following statement: All photographs are fake • To what extent is PhotoShop the cause of mistrust in photography? • Photographers and Surrealism • Landscape Photography and environmentalism • A history of photography from 1945 to 2015 • How to take good portraits Planning an essay • Planned essays are easier...
Words: 1219 - Pages: 5
...| | | | theargumentativetheoryofreasoning The argumentative theory of reasoningBack to projects. Current philosophy and psychology are dominated by what can be called a classical, or ‘Cartesian’ view of reasoning. Even though this view goes back at least to some classical Greek philosophers, its most famous exposition is probably in Descartes. Put plainly, it’s the idea that the role of reasoning is to critically examine our beliefs so as to discard wrong-headed ones and thus create more reliable beliefs—knowledge. This knowledge is in turn supposed to help us make better decisions. This view is hard to reconcile with a wealth of evidence amassed by modern psychology. Tversky and Kahneman (and many others) have demonstrated the failures of reasoning in decision making. Johnson-Laird and Evans (and, again, many others) have shown how fallible reasoning can be. Others have shown that sometimes reasoning too much can make us worse off: it can unduly increase self-confidence, allow us to maintain erroneous beliefs, create distorted, polarized beliefs and enable us to violate our own moral intuitions by finding handy excuses. Sperber claimed that the full import of these results has not been properly gauged since most people still seem to agree, or at least fail to question, the classical, Cartesian assumptions. The theory Dan Sperber suggested—the argumentative theory of reasoning—proposes that instead of having a purely individual function, reasoning has a social and, more...
Words: 2312 - Pages: 10
...Final project in your written component of the Final Project, you will analyze an argument in relation to a specific issue. Then, you will respond to that argument by providing a counterargument. Please choose one reading or media artifact from the Final Project Argument Options. Be sure to choose an issue in which you are interested and for which you have enough factual evidence to create a strong argument. Complete the steps below based on your chosen argument: Step One: Evaluate the Argument a. Identify the issue that is addressed in the argument. b. Explain the argument and identify the premises and conclusions. c. Evaluate the argument. * If the argument has a deductive component, is it valid and sound? Why? * If the argument has an inductive component, is it strong or weak? Why? * Remember that arguments often contain both inductive and deductive components. Do your best to identify all the arguments that are used to support the position presented in the piece. Step Two: Create a Counterargument a. Create a counterargument to the original argument. * Present premises that support your own position while also pointing out the weaknesses inherent in the original argument. Avoid the use of fallacious reasoning and anecdotal evidence. * If you are using inductive arguments, make sure that they are strong. If you are using deductive arguments, make sure that they are valid and attempt to provide sound premises. * Use factual...
Words: 977 - Pages: 4
