(a) Don't foolishly give away marks. Please read and follow instructions carefully. There will be no second chances to resubmit omitted questions.
(b) The due date is December 11 at 11:59:59pm.
(c) Please submit only one assignment per group. Be sure to decide amongst yourselves who the "submitter" will be to avoid complications. Submit it to my gmail address.
(d) Read and follow the instructions carefully.
(e) Barring extenuating circumstances, please submit the assignment via email. I will confirm its receipt. (If submitted before the deadline, I'll confirm as soon as I get the email). If you do not get a confirmation by noon on Thursday Dec 12, please contact me immediately.
(f) Read and follow the instructions carefully.
(g) Don't forget to do section VI (Peer review).
(h) Have fun.
Part I:
(a) Identify the implied argument (both premises and conclusion) and put it into standard form; (b) evaluate the argument by looking at (i) premise acceptability, (ii) premise relevance, (iii) sufficiency; (d) what logical fallacy is being committed? (e) what additional information would have to be provided in order to make the argument strong?
Part II: Arguments from Analogy
(a) Evaluate the argument as we have done in class for arguments using this scheme (b) what are the claimed similarities and how relevant are they, (c) what are the differences and how relevant are they, (d) based on your evaluation, how strong is the argument?
Argument 1 (This is a meme, not an actual study)
An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single student before but had, once, failed an entire class. The class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said ok, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism. All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.
After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. But, as the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too; so they studied little ...
The second Test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around the average was an F. The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone else. All failed to their great surprise and the professor told them that socialism would ultimately fail because the harder to succeed the greater the reward but when a government takes all the reward away; no one will try or succeed.
Argument 2
The federal budget is just like a family budget, and we in government must tight our belts and live within our means just like families do.
Part III: Critical Thinking Smackdown
Part A
Choose two of the following articles and (a) identify as many instances you can of logical fallacies, poor reasoning, poor scientific reasoning, empirically dubious assertions, and issues of burden of proof/proportionality; (b) give a brief one or two sentence justification of your assessment; and (c) suggest for each case what additional information would have to be included to remedy the problem.
Cinnamon and Honey
chemtrails
Tumeric
Part B
From the comments sections of the articles find at least one instance of (a) the post hoc ergo proptor hoc fallacy, (b) the naturalistic fallacy, (c) an illegitimate argument from authority, and (d) one more fallacy or instance of poor reasoning of your choice.
Part IV: Identify that Argument Scheme!
(a) Identify the argument scheme and rewrite the argument in its standard form (b) explain why these instances fail as good instances of the argument scheme, and (c) suggest additional information could be included to strengthen the claim (where possible).
(1) There's no good evidence to show that aspartame is safe for human consumption, therefore we shouldn't consume it.
(2) 82 percent of people with tattoos prefer hot weather over cold, compared with 63 percent of people in general. Therefore, preferring hot weather causes people to get tattoos. Based on a survey of 114 people with tattoos and 579 people in general.
(3) I get headaches after drinking diet soda, therefore aspartame causes headaches.
(4) About 1/2 the students I know receive government financial aid, therefore it's reasonable to conclude that 1/2 the students at UNLV receive government financial aid and are socialists.
(5) There are several cases where multiple people have sighted an object in the sky which they couldn't identify, therefore those objects are alien space crafts.
(6) All my philosophy professors think Aristotle is better than Plato, therefore most philosophy professors must prefer Aristotle to Plato.
Part V: Cognitive Biases
Watch this video starting at about 3:15 to 7:55. Name at least 3 cognitive biases to explain how the Third Eagle of the Apocalypse might have gone astray in his reasoning. Give a couple of specific instances of each those cognitive biases from the video.
Part VI: Bonus Question (worth up to and additional 5% of your score)
Do the following analysis for the meme below: (a) rewrite the argument in its appropriate scheme, (b) fact check the statistics, (c) investigate approximately how much is spent on anti-terrorism, (d) taking the facts you have uncovered into consideration, (i) evaluate the argument as you would for any argument of this type and (ii) employing the principle of charity, assess how strongly is the conclusion supported. (Note: I haven't formed my own opinion yet, so I'm genuinely curious what you guys think.)
Part VII: Peer Evaluation
Every student, in a separate private email, must submit an evaluation for each of your group members contribution to the group project.
According to the following criteria rank each group member on a scale of 1 to 4, where 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=agree, 4=strongly agree.
(A) Attends group meetings regularly and arrives on time.
(B) Contributes meaningfully to group discussions.
(C) Completes group assignments on time.
(D) Prepares work in a quality manner.
(E) Demonstrates a cooperative and supportive attitude.
(F) Contributes significantly to the success of the project.
If your peers give you an average evaluation score that is less than 3 received for the assignment, your score will be minimum a full letter grade less than the group's score, possibly even less.
Part A
Choose two of the following articles and (a) identify as many instances you can of logical fallacies, poor reasoning, poor scientific reasoning, empirically dubious assertions, and issues of burden of proof/proportionality; (b) give a brief one or two sentence justification of your assessment; and (c) suggest for each case what additional information would have to be included to remedy the problem.
Cinnamon and Honey
chemtrails
Tumeric
Part B
From the comments sections of the articles find at least one instance of (a) the post hoc ergo proptor hoc fallacy, (b) the naturalistic fallacy, (c) an illegitimate argument from authority, and (d) one more fallacy or instance of poor reasoning of your choice.
Part IV: Identify that Argument Scheme!
(a) Identify the argument scheme and rewrite the argument in its standard form (b) explain why these instances fail as good instances of the argument scheme, and (c) suggest additional information could be included to strengthen the claim (where possible).
(1) There's no good evidence to show that aspartame is safe for human consumption, therefore we shouldn't consume it.
(2) 82 percent of people with tattoos prefer hot weather over cold, compared with 63 percent of people in general. Therefore, preferring hot weather causes people to get tattoos. Based on a survey of 114 people with tattoos and 579 people in general.
(3) I get headaches after drinking diet soda, therefore aspartame causes headaches.
(4) About 1/2 the students I know receive government financial aid, therefore it's reasonable to conclude that 1/2 the students at UNLV receive government financial aid and are socialists.
(5) There are several cases where multiple people have sighted an object in the sky which they couldn't identify, therefore those objects are alien space crafts.
(6) All my philosophy professors think Aristotle is better than Plato, therefore most philosophy professors must prefer Aristotle to Plato.
Part V: Cognitive Biases
Watch this video starting at about 3:15 to 7:55. Name at least 3 cognitive biases to explain how the Third Eagle of the Apocalypse might have gone astray in his reasoning. Give a couple of specific instances of each those cognitive biases from the video.
Part VI: Bonus Question (worth up to and additional 5% of your score)
Do the following analysis for the meme below: (a) rewrite the argument in its appropriate scheme, (b) fact check the statistics, (c) investigate approximately how much is spent on anti-terrorism, (d) taking the facts you have uncovered into consideration, (i) evaluate the argument as you would for any argument of this type and (ii) employing the principle of charity, assess how strongly is the conclusion supported. (Note: I haven't formed my own opinion yet, so I'm genuinely curious what you guys think.)
Part VII: Peer Evaluation
Every student, in a separate private email, must submit an evaluation for each of your group members contribution to the group project.
According to the following criteria rank each group member on a scale of 1 to 4, where 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=agree, 4=strongly agree.
(A) Attends group meetings regularly and arrives on time.
(B) Contributes meaningfully to group discussions.
(C) Completes group assignments on time.
(D) Prepares work in a quality manner.
(E) Demonstrates a cooperative and supportive attitude.
(F) Contributes significantly to the success of the project.
If your peers give you an average evaluation score that is less than 3 received for the assignment, your score will be minimum a full letter grade less than the group's score, possibly even less.
No comments:
Post a Comment