Mrs. Wumi Abdul has requested that her crack team of critical thinkers undertake the following task on her behalf: She's thinking about limiting restaurant licenses only to businesses that practice "food integrity." Chipotle has applied for a license. She needs to know if she should grant them a license.
Follow the these steps:
(a) Go to this link
(b) Watch the video
(c) What is the implied argument the video makes? Construct the argument using premises and conclusion as we have in class. Evaluate for premise acceptability, relevance, and logical force. On whom does the burden of proof lie? Assess the overall strength of the argument. Have they committed any fallacies? What's the audience? Who are the opponents?
(d) Look at the first comment in the comments section (by Redshirt): What are his argument(s) against Chipotle's conclusion that they serve "food with integrity"? Outline the argument(s) in premise-conclusion form. Evaluate them for premise acceptability, relevance, and sufficiency. Has he committed any fallacies? On whom lies the burden of proof?
(e) Look at LetMeSeeyourPride's comment to HubcapJenny: What is the argument (in premise and conclusion form) and how does it respond to Redshit's argument? Evaluate it as you have for the other arguments.
(f) Look at Redshit to LetMeSeeyourPride: What is it addressing in LetMeSeeyourPride's first argument? What is the argument? (in premise and conclusion form.) Evaluate the argument and how well it responds to Redshirt's initial claims against Chipotle.
(g) Taking into account the arguments offered by Chipotle, Redshirt, and LetMeSeeyouPride, construct an argument for whether Chipotle is food with integrity and, based on that, whether Mrs. Wumi Abdul should grant them a business license.
No comments:
Post a Comment